MangoCats

joined 1 year ago
[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 points 49 minutes ago* (last edited 48 minutes ago)

They’re really good at looking like good code which makes it not always obvious when it’s not, even to an experienced developer.

There can be a lot of difference between an experienced developer and a good/responsible developer.

Know your limits. Professional engineering has been wrestling with these problems for a long time - unfortunately the practices of professional apprenticeship, sealed drawings etc. have only informally been partially migrated into the software development world.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 points 52 minutes ago

There's a certain amount of random in how a chainsaw operates... will a certain cut cause the chain to be thrown or not? That has a lot to do with how you use the saw, maintain the tension on and lubrication in the chain, what you're trying to cut, etc. and the same goes for the LLMs. They are based on statistics and "heat" of how far down the list of top results they choose for their answer, but you are the LLM operator, you choose what to do with its output, how much agency give it, how thoroughly you review and test its output before using it.

Inexperienced idiots would use no chain lube while cutting a 20" dbh standing hardwood with a 14" saw and just doing a straight plunge cut on the downwind / leaning to side of the tree where they will bind the bar inbetween the base and the rest of the tree if they're lucky enough to even get that far. With enough perseverence they just might drop the tree on their house. It's the same with LLMs, or traditional programming. Put the local high school chess club in charge of the ICBM targeting software? You get what you deserve.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 0 points 1 hour ago

If you don't know what you're doing, you shouldn't be using powerful tools in the first place, whether that's heavy lift cranes, chainsaws, arc welders, or driving an SUV 80mph...

The day may come when the token generator manipulates you to keep you subscribed, but at this point in time I don't believe the frontier models are playing those games too extensively - at least not models like GPT and Claude.

Back in the 1990s I was deeply impressed that when my ISP's service started sucking, I could use their service to search for and find alternate ISPs to switch my subscription to. I wondered how long that would continue - so far, you still can - although since broadband came around much of the U.S. is locked into essentially monopoly providers of last-mile connectivity service.

Hopefully, there will be enough competition among LLM providers that subscribers continue to have choices to move to non-manipulative models.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it -4 points 2 hours ago (4 children)

No, but a statistical token generator can help you create a deterministic algorithmic program quickly, if you know what you are doing.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 3 points 2 hours ago

I looked at LLM tools for software development a year ago, it was clearly unhelpful then. Showing some inklings of promise, but "just not there for our work" yet.

I looked six months ago and the advancement was dramatic, while it was helpful sometimes and not others six months ago it was clearly improving at an impressive pace. Mind you, I've been dabbling with "AI" since the 1980s, built a software neural net in 1991 and tried to make it do something useful back then, so... obviously what we've got now is DRAMATICALLY better and faster improving that it was waaay back like that.

Over the past six months it has become solidly "better" for a lot of uses than the methods it replaces. Now, I also notice big players like Google have been "enshittifying" their previous services for a few years leading up to this, so a lot of the "good stuff" I get from AI now is just what I used to get from basic search or "voice assistant" a few years back, but even ignoring that phenomenon - the frontier models really are better than anything that came before in a lot of ways.

Also, starting six months ago, I actively engaged in learning how to use the LLM based tools - and I believe much of the improvement I have experienced is due to me learning how to use the tools better, in addition to the tools themselves improving.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it -4 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

but you only convince yourself that you think critically when you’re instructing an AI, it’s not the same and it actively makes you a worse engineer every time you decide to use it instead of thinking.

So, if you're a lumberjack and you used hand tools to chop down trees, and due to the amount of time and effort required to chop down a tree with hand tools you traditionally thought carefully about how you're cutting the tree before and while you were cutting it (not guaranteed - some lumberjacks still made stupid / unthinking cuts) - then along come gas powered chainsaws. Now you have options: you can spend more time thinking about the cuts before you make them and make even better - more careful cuts which make the process safer and easier to extract the logs after you fell them, or you can just go out and chop down 10x as many trees in the same time as before - thinking less than you did before because it's just so damn amazing how many trees you can cut down in a day now.

Software development carries less immediate risk to the software developers than arborists experience in their field work. Software development also manifests many of its risks on a longer time horizon, more difficult to predict or even link to the development work. But the choices with AI development are very much the same: are you going to take the time to understand what your powerful new tool is doing, or are you just going to fire it up and show off how fast it does what it does?

Management comes into play in both fields, and bad management pushing either kind of field workers to cut staff and "increase productivity" by arbitrary (bad) metrics has been demonstrated over and over to produce bad results.

There are no such things as "AI experts" at this time - it's far too new for that, much like "expert software systems developers" in the 1980s, the methods are just barely beginning to be developed. Applied judiciously, with proper care, it is already a powerful tool - but like they used to say even back in the early 1970s: "To Err is Human; To Really Foul Things Up Requires a Computer"

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/12/07/foul-computer/

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it -1 points 4 hours ago

"Over the last few months, we have stopped getting AI slop security reports in the curl project," said Daniel Stenberg, founder and lead developer of curl, in a social media post. "They're gone. Instead, we get an ever-increasing amount of really good security reports, almost all done with the help of AI."

https://www.theregister.com/2026/04/06/ai_coding_tools_more_work/

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it -5 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

despite the enormous efforts to create tools that manipulate it into working more predictably, it still sucks so much of the time.

LLMs surpass experts in predicting experimental outcomes. BrainGPT, an LLM we tuned on the neuroscience literature, performed better yet.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-024-02046-9

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 3 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Draftee casualties in a US proxy war.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 2 points 4 days ago

I believe it has been pushed back multiple times.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 4 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Artemis has been in the works for over 20 years, this is the first time the project didn't get delayed for ... reasons.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 points 4 days ago

Each contract worker is a link. Each company is a link. Each congress critter playing for missile pork projects in their district is a link. And this isn't just about the missiles, as you say: who are we trying to impress? What are we trying to get in exchange for that impression?

 

What is this recurring connection between big missiles sending men to the moon and the military industrial complex sending expeditionary forces overseas?

 

996: 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., 6 days a week

Sure, they're burnt out, sluggish, surly, but... they're present. And when they're present, they're not out in the world spending their income. They don't need an expensive apartment or house, all they do there is sleep. Why have a fancy car when all you do is drive to/from your shitty job in it? Family? Who would have children with somebody who works such a schedule?

Even if you got more productivity from the same workers on a 9 a.m. to 3 p.m., 4 days a week schedule, you'd have to pay them more, not just per hour but overall, because they'd be out spending money on those afternoons / evenings and 3 days a week they have off. Organizing, demanding better healthcare, dental, more paid time off for vacations, and higher total wages to support all these "needs" they invent for themselves on their time off.

Keep 'em locked down, keep 'em tasked with ... anything, doesn't matter if it's productive or not, as long as it keeps them on-the-job and not spending their pay.

Edit: apparently this isn't clear: 996 is a horrible idea from all perspectives, it's bad for the workers and bad for their employers overall. But, in certain twisted views, it would be a bit like military service where the (bulk of the) workers get a pitifully small paycheck, but they don't have any real expenses so they have the option to save it all. 996 would turn that more into a wage-slave implementation where the pitifully small paycheck is just enough to meet their pitifully small expenses. In the China tech sector where they have implemented this (it is now illegal, but still practiced) they also do things like install anti-suicide nets in the stairwells of the highrises the workers work and sleep in.

 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/31879711

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/20187958

A prominent computer scientist who has spent 20 years publishing academic papers on cryptography, privacy, and cybersecurity has gone incommunicado, had his professor profile, email account, and phone number removed by his employer Indiana University, and had his homes raided by the FBI. No one knows why.

Xiaofeng Wang has a long list of prestigious titles. He was the associate dean for research at Indiana University's Luddy School of Informatics, Computing and Engineering, a fellow at the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and a tenured professor at Indiana University at Bloomington. According to his employer, he has served as principal investigator on research projects totaling nearly $23 million over his 21 years there.

He has also co-authored scores of academic papers on a diverse range of research fields, including cryptography, systems security, and data privacy, including the protection of human genomic data. I have personally spoken to him on three occasions for articles herehere, and here.

"None of this is in any way normal"

In recent weeks, Wang's email account, phone number, and profile page at the Luddy School were quietly erased by his employer. Over the same time, Indiana University also removed a profile for his wife, Nianli Ma, who was listed as a Lead Systems Analyst and Programmer at the university's Library Technologies division.

According to the Herald-Times in Bloomington, a small fleet of unmarked cars driven by government agents descended on the Bloomington home of Wang and Ma on Friday. They spent most of the day going in and out of the house and occasionally transferred boxes from their vehicles. TV station WTHR, meanwhile, reported that a second home owned by Wang and Ma and located in Carmel, Indiana, was also searched. The station said that both a resident and an attorney for the resident were on scene during at least part of the search.

Attempts to locate Wang and Ma have so far been unsuccessful. An Indiana University spokesman didn't answer emailed questions asking if the couple was still employed by the university and why their profile pages, email addresses and phone numbers had been removed. The spokesman provided the contact information for a spokeswoman at the FBI's field office in Indianapolis. In an email, the spokeswoman wrote: "The FBI conducted court authorized law enforcement activity at homes in Bloomington and Carmel Friday. We have no further comment at this time."

Searches of federal court dockets turned up no documents related to Wang, Ma, or any searches of their residences. The FBI spokeswoman didn't answer questions seeking which US district court issued the warrant and when, and whether either Wang or Ma is being detained by authorities. Justice Department representatives didn't return an email seeking the same information. An email sent to a personal email address belonging to Wang went unanswered at the time this post went live. Their resident status (e.g. US citizens or green card holders) is currently unknown.

Fellow researchers took to social media over the weekend to register their concern over the series of events.

"None of this is in any way normal," Matthew Green, a professor specializing in cryptography at Johns Hopkins University, wrote on Mastodon. He continued: "Has anyone been in contact? I hear he’s been missing for two weeks and his students can’t reach him. How does this not get noticed for two weeks???"

In the same thread, Matt Blaze, a McDevitt Professor of Computer Science and Law at Georgetown University said: "It's hard to imagine what reason there could be for the university to scrub its website as if he never worked there. And while there's a process for removing tenured faculty, it takes more than an afternoon to do it."

Local news outlets reported the agents spent several hours moving boxes in an out of the residences. WTHR provided the following details about the raid on the Carmel home:

Neighbors say the agents announced "FBI, come out!" over a megaphone.

A woman came out of the house holding a phone. A video from a neighbor shows an agent taking that phone from her. She was then questioned in the driveway before agents began searching the home, collecting evidence and taking photos.

A car was pulled out of the garage slightly to allow investigators to access the attic.

The woman left the house before 13News arrived. She returned just after noon accompanied by a lawyer. The group of ten or so investigators left a few minutes later.

The FBI would not say what they were looking for or who is under investigation. A bureau spokesperson issued a statement: “I can confirm we conducted court-authorized activity at the address in Carmel today. We have no further comment at this time.”

Investigators were at the house for about four hours before leaving with several boxes of evidence. 13News rang the doorbell when the agents were gone. A lawyer representing the family who answered the door told us they're not sure yet what the investigation is about.

This post will be updated if new details become available. Anyone with first-hand knowledge of events involving Wang, Ma, or the investigation into either is encouraged to contact me, preferably over Signal at DanArs.82. The email address is: dan.goodin@arstechnica.com.

view more: next ›