top | item 46545000

(no title)

throwmeaway820 | 1 month ago

> it appears to me to be really hard to guard against

I don't want to sound glib, but one could simply not let an LLM execute arbitrary code without reviewing it first, or only let it execute code inside an isolated environment designed to run untrusted code

the idea of letting an LLM execute code it's dreamt up, with no oversight, in an environment you care about, is absolutely bananas to me

discuss

order

blibble|1 month ago

> the idea of letting an LLM execute code it's dreamt up, with no oversight, in an environment you care about, is absolutely bananas to me

but if a skilled human has to check everything it does then "AI" becomes worthless

hence... YOLO

Terr_|1 month ago

> if a skilled human has to check everything it does then "AI" becomes worthless

Well, perhaps not worthless, but certainly not "a trillion-dollar revolution that will let me fire 90% of my workforce and then execute my Perfect Rich Guy Visionary Ideas without any more pesky back-talk."

That said, the "worth" is brings to the shareholders will likely be a downgrade for everybody else, both workers and consumers, because:

> The market’s bet on AI is that an AI salesman will visit the CEO of Kaiser and make this pitch: “Look, you fire 9/10s of your radiologists [...] and the remaining radiologists’ job will be to oversee the diagnoses the AI makes at superhuman speed, and somehow remain vigilant as they do so, despite the fact that the AI is usually right, except when it’s catastrophically wrong.

> “And if the AI misses a tumor, this will be the human radiologist’s fault, because they are the ‘human in the loop.’ It’s their signature on the diagnosis.”

> This is a reverse centaur, and it’s a specific kind of reverse-centaur: it’s what Dan Davies [calls] an “accountability sink.” The radiologist’s job isn’t really to oversee the AI’s work, it’s to take the blame for the AI’s mistakes.

-- https://doctorow.medium.com/https-pluralistic-net-2025-12-05...

mlyle|1 month ago

I have to check what junior engineers do before running it in production. And AI is just really fast junior engineering.

ertian|1 month ago

It could be as useful as a junior dev. You probably shouldn't let a junior dev run arbitrary commands in production without some sort of oversight or rails, either.

Even as a more experienced dev, I like having a second pair of eyes on critical commands...

alexjplant|1 month ago

I think a nice compromise would be to restrict agentic coding workflows to cloud containers and a web interface. Bootstrap a project and new functional foundations locally using traditional autocomplete/chat methods (which you want to anyway to avoid a foundation of StackOverflow-derived slop) then implement additional features using the cloud agents. Don't commit any secrets to SCM and curate the tools that these agents can use. This way your dev laptops are firmly in human control (with IDEs freed up for actual coding) while LLMs are safelt leveraged. Win-win.

sigmonsays|1 month ago

just wait until the exploit is so heavily obfuscated that you just review and allow it to get the project done.

therobots927|1 month ago

You could literally ask the LLM to obfuscate it and I bet it would do a pretty good job. Good luck parsing 1,000 lines of code manually to identify an exploit that you’re not even specifically looking for.