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.
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.
5 Comments
db2@lemmy.world · 22 pts · 103d
Solumbran@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 103d
Hardening with AI, lmao
skarn@discuss.tchncs.de · 16 pts · 102d
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.
dsilverz@calckey.world · -3 pts · 102d
@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.
warmaster@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 103d
Sloppening
verdi@tarte.nuage-libre.fr · 1 pts · 103d