Linux

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] skarn@discuss.tchncs.de 16 points 4 months ago (2 children)

But I mean why? Used in this way, AI systems are just another static analysis tool.

Sure, a computationally inefficient one, but if you can get the signal/noise region high enough, anything that helps you find bugs seems fair game to me.

One has to review their work, and take any fix offered by the slopmachine with a lot of care, of course.

And Anthropic is a bad company, but we are talking about detecting security vulnerabilities in Firefox by wasting Anthropic money. That seems like win-win.

The only downside (and I admit it's big) is that Anthropic gets some publicity out of this.

hideshow 2 child comments

parent

[–] dsilverz@calckey.world -5 points 4 months ago (1 child)

@skarn@discuss.tchncs.de @Solumbran@lemmy.world @linux@lemmy.ml

Have you considered the possibility that, by "finding a bug" and possibly "suggesting" a "patch", the LLM could be smuggling another bug unbeknownst to the vibe coder(s) and/or smuggling a technical debt?

I say this as someone who've been coding since my 8s (now I'm 30), someone who hasn't the tribalistic anti-AI sentiment (I even use LLMs sometimes, particularly the non-Western ones such as Deepseek and Qwen) but understands LLMs enough to know how the (current, state-of-the-art) stochastic parrots shouldn't be trusted the source code of any slightly serious project, especially a full browser that Firefox is. Chances are devs are going to blindly trust and obediently stage-and-commit whatever the parroting machine spits out, and this can end up really messy. Given the ongoing pivot to AI from Mozilla, I doubt they're worried about the consequences of vibe coding, though.

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] gary_host_laptop@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago

mozilla already said people are doing the fixing afaik, claude only finds them