Employee #1 and Director of Software Engineering (AU) @bugcrowd. Ruby, infosec, pol. He/him Social media is bad for you Cryptocurrencies are bad for the planet.
My AI assistant refuses to believe that Anthropic launched a model named 'Fable 5', I've had to tell it to go google it, even gave it a link and it accused me of winding it up. I'm not entirely sure how to feel about these developments.
This is required reading today.
@caseyjohnellis didn't even write this today about MSRC - but it nails it.
Full disclosure IS the agreed upon path forward to keep a vendor in check who stonewalls, threatens, or otherwise is shit to work with for security researchers.
I've got an agent in a loop optimizing a renderer with the goal to minimize frame times (and tests to measure). It got times down from 88ms to 2ms and allocations down from ~150K to 500. Sounds good, right? Wrong. This is exactly why agent psychosis is a big fucking problem.
As an experiment, I rewrote the Ghostty core render state in Go, with access to identically laid out data structures as Ghostty and the exact same validation tests. I made a purposely naive renderer (simple, correct, but slow). 88ms per frame with 150,000 allocations (horrendous, lol)!
I then kickstarted a Ralph loop to bring the frame times down. I told it it can't modify input data structures or the public API or tests (they're correct), but it can do anything else it wants. It got to work.
It has worked for about 4 hours. I've spent around $350 on this experiment so far. The results?
88ms => 1.5ms
150K allocs => ~500 allocs
Incredible right? Nope.
My hand-written renderer I ported has frame times (same benchmark) of ~20us (0.020ms) and 0 allocations in the update path.
This is the problem with psychosis and lacking systems understanding. If you don't understand the system, you're going to accept that this is an incredible result. If you understand the system, you'll see better solutions immediately and can do roughly 75x better on throughput.
The people who blindly trust agent output are in the former camp. They're sheeple, overdrinking from a fountain of mediocrity.
Standard disclaimer: I use AI all the time. I like AI. The point I'm making is to not blindly accept results. Think. Analyze. Learn.
you know how nobody likes talking to the security people?
i hear you saying "well maybe i like that? more time for computers?"
so true, but if you don't talk to them about computers, the marketing people will
still not quite over the fact that i watched 15 year olds get sued for millions of dollars for downloading twelve songs and now we all have to accept AI slop because every tech company in the known universe decided that IP laws don't exist now that they're inconvenient for them
On the latest round of fertility discourse, friends don't let friends share chart 1 without the important context of chart 2, which is @lymanstoneky's child-survival adjustment:
It simultaneously feels like 1) I can use agents to build anything quickly, but also 2) they have no sense of aesthetics when writing code, so everything comes out a mess, never unified by any vision. It's such a bizarre combination.
My kinda hot take on the Mythos stuff is really that there is so little money in offensive research that it's still not really that hard to find bugs. These AI companies are operating with budgets that make the entire offensive research of all big tech combined look like a joke
Jordon Steele-John unleashes on Pauline Hanson after she accused ppl with disabilities of rorting the NDIS
“You have no right to speak on disability issues until you have cleaned up your act”🔥 & using “taxpayer money” to attack disabled ppl with “disgusting” animations #auspol
@InsiderPhD I wasn't involved personally but from previous startups and what I saw: VC backing goes far with Bay Area banks, especially if you could (at the time) describe it as "uber for X". That, a healthy dose of charisma, and a lot of blood sweat and tears over the KYC/AML requirements