190
Linux security vulnerabilities fixed per kernel version (lemmy.ml)
submitted 1 week ago by to c/linux@lemmy.ml
88 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Something good coming out of AI, it seems.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 1 week ago (16 children)

Some people seem to be unable to fathom the fact that AI can be useful in some circumstances, always assuming the worst despite no evidence to suggest it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago (15 children)

    AI can be useful in some circumstances

    And the point is that this statement can be true AND we can still think AI should cease to be used. The "useful in some circumstances" benefit does not justify the ethical and environmental cost.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (14 children)

    What would your preferred outcome in this situation be then? The bad guys are going to use AI to find exploits. What should the good guys do?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago

    Dollars to donuts says they don't have a preferred outcome, or at least not anything that amounts to more than wishful thinking.

    It's crazy how many people have only reactionary opinions that are largely divorced from reality when it comes to humanity's relationship with AI.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (12 children)

    What should the good guys do?

    Legislate AI away, except for the already existing open models that run on consumer-grade GPUs and are therefore orders of magnitude weaker and can't be used to break down any systems.

    Or penalize heavily any company developing a model that is subsequently used to invade a system, stopping this madness of separating the models from the operators of said models.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (10 children)

    Legislate AI away

    Yes, because that has worked so well in the past for alcohol, cannabis, homosexuality, or nuclear proliferation.

    existing open models that run on consumer-grade GPUs and are therefore orders of magnitude weaker and can't be used to break down any systems.

    This class of models is already perfectly capable of finding and exploiting vulnerabilities in software, and is within spitting distance of the frontier.

    Or penalize heavily any company developing a model that is subsequently used to invade a system.

    Yeah, that case will be on the docket right behind U.S.A. vs Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Raytheon surely.

    Do you seriously believe any of these are within the realm of possibility, or even believability?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 week ago (7 children)

    Yes, because that has worked so well in the past for alcohol, cannabis, homosexuality, or nuclear proliferation.

    A list of examples where prohibition didn't work is quite far from an argument that it never works, Plato. Leaded gasoline, CFCs, asbestos, DDT, should I go on?

    This class of models is already perfectly capable of finding and exploiting vulnerabilities in software, and is within spitting distance of the frontier.

    If you think frontier models are close to Qwen running on your 5090, you're completely devoid of any knowledge on the subject and therefore this discussion becomes meaningless.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 week ago (6 children)

    Your examples of prohibition and mine are not the same. Mine were purposefully chosen because they are or were contentious, just like AI is now.

    Your examples, on the other hand, outline situations where we were using something harmful that we did not realize at the time was harmful. Once that realization came to light, everyone agreed to stop. If you want to say this is the current situation with AI, then that's coherent. This is my olive branch to you.

    As for local models if you want to maintain that DSv4.1, GLM-5.3-f, M-3.1, or ther ilk are not near frontier-level. Then, I guess you are allowed to be wrong.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 week ago (5 children)

    As for local models if you want to maintain that DSv4.1, GLM-5.3-f, M-3.1, or ther ilk are not near frontier-level. Then, I guess you are allowed to be wrong.

    lol

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    Qwen 3.8 27b is now on par with claud fable 5 acording to this benchmark local llms are only a few months behind frontier models and are capable of many things.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child)

    Fable is rank 5, Qwen 3.8 (with nothing claiming it's the reduced 27b one) is rank 29, fuck you are you talking about.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago

    That's fable 5.1 I said fable 5. Also it seems like the link I sent wasn't for the benchmark I meant to send. Try to find the one for code rather than agentic work. Qwen 3.8 27B scores 1590 while Claude fable 5 scores 1624 which is a very slim margin considering fable 5 was one of, if not the best model when it was released.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent