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.
I’m anti LLM for a lot of applications, for a lot of reasons, but there are obviously things that it is useful for, and I think this is one of them. If a cybersecurity specialist reviews the flaws flagged by the LLM, confirms they are legitimate, and uses that data to fix them, I don’t see an issue.
A very useful thing I found is the following: take a couple hours thinking about interesting research ideas. Work out with chatgpt existing solutions and identify key publications. Use Claude code to modify existing software to do something new.
In one day of work you got a proof of concept of whether your idea may work. Of course from there on you have to work it out and make it good, but having a confirmation quickly completely changes the fact that you normally have to go through dozens of papers and take several months to review existing publications on the topic.
I agree people turn a blind eye to a breakthrough just to be left behind when its used against them. Inform yourself so you can be an informed member of society.
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.
I’m anti LLM for a lot of applications, for a lot of reasons, but there are obviously things that it is useful for, and I think this is one of them. If a cybersecurity specialist reviews the flaws flagged by the LLM, confirms they are legitimate, and uses that data to fix them, I don’t see an issue.
A very useful thing I found is the following: take a couple hours thinking about interesting research ideas. Work out with chatgpt existing solutions and identify key publications. Use Claude code to modify existing software to do something new. In one day of work you got a proof of concept of whether your idea may work. Of course from there on you have to work it out and make it good, but having a confirmation quickly completely changes the fact that you normally have to go through dozens of papers and take several months to review existing publications on the topic.
I agree people turn a blind eye to a breakthrough just to be left behind when its used against them. Inform yourself so you can be an informed member of society.
The amount of Claude Mythos disinformation pushed by MSM is crazy.
That hasn’t aged well.
Why do you think that?
Were you thinking of this instead?
*gestures at OP*
No. Why would I?
What makes you think your article makes Anthropic look any less meager or perverse (respectively) in the two articles I provided?
I don’t actually know what you mean.
I provided articles that describe it. What specific things do you think are wrong about them?
I simply don’t know what you mean at all.