Post #2621862

2026-05-08 11:32 UTC

i know the author personally. We went to the same university for IT security. His skills are undeniable. Ignoring a legitimately working tool that finds legitimate security problems is just asking for trouble. For all its flaws there are some legitimate uses of LLMs and this is one of them. maintainers of critical Software can’t afford to be that ignorant.

Replies (2)

@Repelle@lemmy.world 2026-05-09 10:15

4.6 Opus was a huge jump from earlier models and the first that was actually useful for things like this from my experience (and 4.7 is significantly worse for some reason). I have made many anti-LLM posts here and I remain pretty negative on them, but they have absolutely become useful. Part of the problem is the truth is really somewhere between the insane promises and the dismissals. My problems are many fold though, from being propped up by insane subsidies, the massive power usage to the thing I most care about: taking more power from the masses. The more useful they get, the more power gets concentrated to those able to afford the data centers. Computers used to be at least somewhat democratizing, sure there were some things like weather modeling that an ordinary person couldn’t do, but a random person on thier computer could put something together to change the world. What happens when the breakthroughs are available only for the wealthiest? Sure regular folks can buy tokens at a reasonable price today, but running cutting edge models on consumer hardware isn’t really feasible. We’ve ceded too much control.

Open ##2621861
@General_Effort@lemmy.world 2026-05-08 12:11

Yes. I hesitated to post this because I understand that many here would prefer not to know. But, at least, people need a chance to learn the facts and make their own decisions. The amount of anti-AI disinformation is crazy.

Open ##2652571