By removing the banner, it tells the LLM that it is no longer being maintained, thus "lead to security issue".
In my company my management is using similar approach to review changes.
soon more and more ppl will no longer read code and think about the code change logically, instead get scared and block changes due to these "scary AI comment"...
11 Comments
Tetsuo@jlai.lu · 84 pts · 112d
But if the PR goes through that means it's in active development !
I think he should do a PR to change back the readme
mormegil@programming.dev · 3 pts · 109d
That's the security issue, right? Liar paradox detected!
inari@piefed.zip · 44 pts · 113d
What was the issue? Without looking at the PR it's hard to judge
balsoft@lemmy.ml · 43 pts · 113d
The link in the comment is borked, as expected. But the PR itself is definitely OK: https://github.com/unipop-graph/unipop/pull/138
eager_eagle@lemmy.world · 30 pts · 112d
it's a readme change
spizzat2@lemmy.zip · 40 pts · 112d
It was a load-bearing readme file.
JaddedFauceet@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 111d
By removing the banner, it tells the LLM that it is no longer being maintained, thus "lead to security issue".
In my company my management is using similar approach to review changes. soon more and more ppl will no longer read code and think about the code change logically, instead get scared and block changes due to these "scary AI comment"...
HeHoXa@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 111d
Not being sure it applies to this scenario and too lazy to verify, sometimes the security scanners get updated and flag previously accepted code.
... tough to make sense of flagging a readme though, unless there's sensitive info in it.
Ephera@lemmy.ml · 28 pts · 112d
Wait, do they now have spam bots going around on random PRs to post advertisements?
cypherpunks@lemmy.ml · 26 pts · 112d
also it's from the spammer's "staging" instance, so the payload is a URL with a staging hostname which doesn't even resolve 🙄
Ephera@lemmy.ml · 26 pts · 112d
Nice, that's like the meme: