▲ 641 ▼ Fed up with vibe coders, dev sneaks data-nuking prompt injection into their code - Ars Technica (arstechnica.com) submitted 2 months ago by hamburgheftig@feddit.org to c/technology@lemmy.world 161 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 months ago* (1 child) Yes it can, its literally still code. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mabeledo@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 child) I know it’s code. You are missing the point. Any library with a critical user mass is auditable, because a fraction of those users would take the time to do so, whereas all LLM generated variations of the same library cannot and will never be auditable. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 months ago (1 child) That's literally not what you said, you said "LLM code can not be auditable" which is demonstrably wrong. Go ahead and move the goal posts though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mabeledo@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) You missed the context. I don’t blame you. Tell me how in hell are you going to audit every single variation of code generated by a LLM, that's equivalent to a whole library. I'll wait. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mabeledo@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 child) I know it’s code. You are missing the point. Any library with a critical user mass is auditable, because a fraction of those users would take the time to do so, whereas all LLM generated variations of the same library cannot and will never be auditable. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 months ago (1 child) That's literally not what you said, you said "LLM code can not be auditable" which is demonstrably wrong. Go ahead and move the goal posts though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mabeledo@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) You missed the context. I don’t blame you. Tell me how in hell are you going to audit every single variation of code generated by a LLM, that's equivalent to a whole library. I'll wait. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 months ago (1 child) That's literally not what you said, you said "LLM code can not be auditable" which is demonstrably wrong. Go ahead and move the goal posts though. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mabeledo@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) You missed the context. I don’t blame you. Tell me how in hell are you going to audit every single variation of code generated by a LLM, that's equivalent to a whole library. I'll wait. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mabeledo@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) You missed the context. I don’t blame you. Tell me how in hell are you going to audit every single variation of code generated by a LLM, that's equivalent to a whole library. I'll wait. permalink fedilink source parent