1 comment

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[โ€“] 6 points 8 months ago

Finally, something useful.
Now let's hope they don't make the AI "patch" it.

  • source
  • 9 comments in c/technology@lemmy.world view that post
    [โ€“] 29 points 8 months ago (7 children)

    I'll take a more secure Firefox. If this is how it is achieved, so be it.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [โ€“] 10 points 8 months ago (6 children)

    Yeah I'm actually kinda into this. Even if the AI vomits up a bunch of hallucinated vulnerabilities, there's a team of (presumably) capable people there to figure that out. Seems like a pretty valid use for the technology.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [โ€“] -3 points 8 months ago (5 children)

    Hallucinated? From researched and documented code spelunking?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [โ€“] 2 points 8 months ago (4 children)

    That's...exactly my point though...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [โ€“] -1 points 8 months ago (3 children)
  • [โ€“] 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

    That even though the team is using AI to check for vulnerabilities, they're trained and know when their AI is hallucinating and when it's not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [โ€“] -1 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    I guess Iโ€™m not sure how hallucinating and reading from source code are overlapping. Do you think these models are just barfing back garbage nonsense?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [โ€“] 12 points 8 months ago
    1 comment in c/firefox@lemmy.ml view that post
    [+] -15 points 8 months ago (1 child)