this post was submitted on 11 Oct 2026
1609 points (98.6% liked)

linuxmemes

33069 readers
1705 users here now

Hint: :q!


Sister communities:


Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack users for any reason. This includes using blanket terms, like "every user of thing".
  • Don't get baited into back-and-forth insults. We are not animals.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry of any kind will not be tolerated. This is an LGBTQ+-friendly community -- if that is a problem for you, you should leave.
  • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn, no politics, no trolling or ragebaiting.
  • Don't come looking for advice, this is not the right community.
  • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, <loves / tolerates / hates> systemd, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.
  • 5. πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ Language/язык/Sprache
  • This is primarily an English-speaking community. πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§πŸ‡¦πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ
  • Comments written in other languages are allowed.
  • The substance of a post should be comprehensible for people who only speak English.
  • Titles and post bodies written in other languages will be allowed, but only as long as the above rule is observed.
  • 6. (NEW!) Regarding public figuresWe all have our opinions, and certain public figures can be divisive. Keep in mind that this is a community for memes and light-hearted fun, not for airing grievances or leveling accusations.
  • Keep discussions polite and free of disparagement.
  • We are never in possession of all of the facts. Defamatory comments will not be tolerated.
  • Discussions that get too heated will be locked and offending comments removed.
  • Β 

    Please report posts and comments that break these rules!


    Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't remove France.

    founded 3 years ago
    MODERATORS
    1609
    Of course (media.piefed.zip)
    submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by inari@piefed.zip to c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world
     
    you are viewing a single comment's thread
    view the rest of the comments
    [–] LH0ezVT@sh.itjust.works 43 points 17 hours ago (7 children)

    Tinfoil hat time:

    A year ago, I did some reverse engineering. I figured a pattern matching engine has to be good matching patterns, so I threw the messed-up output of Ghidra into Claude to clean it up and to give me an overview of what the fuck happens in a certain part.

    I was absolutely surprised. Sure, it got some things wrong, but it knew way more than it should have been able to guess from that short bit of fucked up, optimised not-quite-C. Including guessing context that it should not be able to guess. This was a firmware with not-yet-released functions that, to my knowledge, shouldn't exist outside of this bit of binary firmware. At least not for us non-NDA mortals.

    At the time, Mistral had a new-ish model as well, so I figured I'd give it a try. It worked as expected, cleaned up things, gave variables reasonable names, made educated guesses and so on, but didn't act as if it had background info. And I was using Sonnet 4.x, so the small Claude which shouldn't be that much larger.

    Since then, I have the conspiracy theory that the Claude people threw a bunch of proprietary sources in the training, too. I have no idea how, maybe aggressively training on user inputs? Anyway, this does not help to allalleviate my suspicions.

    [–] OctopusNemeses@lemmy.world 5 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

    They're using gig workers by the hundreds of thousands, if not millions to do "data annotation". You can actually make quite a bit if you've got higher credentials like Phd, masters, or a very good resume.

    My theory is they've been using professionals to inadvertently leak proprietary methodologies. They could be doing so by creating problems for them to solve that lead people to inadvertently expose solutions based on their actual jobs.

    It's lowkey corporate espionage.

    [–] AlteredEgo@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

    Oh it learned enough from code that it has developed some basic, and hear me out of this, artificial verbal intelligence. I know I know, not just pattern matching, but actual artificial intelligence at a low level.

    Please don't downvote me (sorry don't remember if this is fuckai or not) but I'm just saying it's one possible explanation to this phenomenon you describe.

    [–] starelfsc2@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

    i would err towards it ingesting proprietary code before this, it's not wrong but AI spits out copyrighted and should-be private stuff all the time.

    [–] AlteredEgo@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 hours ago

    There are studies and tools like LiCoEval and others that investigate LLM memorization. It does happen but it's not all the time, and it's very infrequent for real world (complex) examples. Mostly this concerns textbook examples or standard boilerplate code - from what I read. And I obviously don't know the specific example mentioned. This is also a problem that can be fixed.

    But I'm really just half mocking the very careful language used by the comment I replied to.

    [–] BCsven@lemmy.ca 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

    I threw about 10 short phrased meeting notes (4-5 words each) into an LLM to get some document formatting started with titles and sections etc. It built a full scope document and inferred a ton of information about the project and product. It was surprising how much it could infer, and suggested very sensible testing criteria and alternate solutions should the main product path not pan out.

    I can see why people start believing it "thinks", because it was remarkable what it "understood" about a vague new product. Had I sent the info out to stake holders, they would have assumed this person was a key team member that was involved from day 1.

    [–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

    "Intelligence", as a word has always been ill defined. What's it mean? It's mostly been used to create prejudices via standardized tests, the bell curve, and IQ tests.

    I don't believe it's "intelligent" as we don't really know how to define that. But I do think it's really really really good at writing reasonable seeming statements in various languages using probability.

    Coding and programming, are just languages. So it will likely be able to get pretty damn good at it, just as it has with the English language.

    I think with LLMs accurate regurgitation of facts, is the colary to good code.

    But I don't believe that means it "thinks" (which requires introspection, and an internal experience). It does multi-agent computing, and this might even simulate some aspects of thinking... But it's not thinking. It's computing.

    It won't be able to do any more than that, until it consistently gets data from having a body (and something like glial thought-interactions/organs/flaws/survival).

    [–] DarkCloud@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

    By the way, this also means if you could download a mind to a computer - it would slowly lose it's humanity as it lived longer and longer interfacing with computer systems rather than human systems/organs/experiencs.

    Eventually that "uploaded human" would become a Clankr, and stop understanding human life, the will to survive/think. Eventually it would just compute (not think/care or have flaws).

    Many sci-fi stories are based on the man-to-technology-to-cold-rational-evil pipeline... Less have gone in the other direction, even though it often produces very popular characters: Spock, Data, the Terminator, Pinnoccio.

    [–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 17 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

    I specifically asked our CEO about this just to cover my ass. It seems insane to trust these guys at all. Here in the USA, small businesses have de facto no legal protection from large businesses.

    [–] LH0ezVT@sh.itjust.works 13 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

    Absolutely. Especially if you have company info / IP that someone else would pay a lot for. This is a question for lawyers and managers to negotiate with the lawyers at OpenAI, Anthropic etc, not for us little people to decide. I'm not throwing company data in an online service that is not cleared for us to use, and I don't even work with spicy stuff. Back in my IT days we would have called that a data breach, which would have lead to something from an unpleasant hour in the boss' office to a promotion to customer.

    [–] Wirlocke@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

    Makes me wonder how much of the frontier models hacking is just "our devs uploaded the codebase to Claude and suddenly it knows where all the backdoors are"?

    [–] porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 hours ago

    I guess most, honestly

    [–] katze@lemmy.4d2.org 29 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

    Since then, I have the conspiracy theory that the Claude people threw a bunch of proprietary sources in the training, too.

    An enormous amount of people use this technology for privat company data without batting an eye; not just software developers, but business people for reports, etc.

    They all throw their confidential data in there without even considering the implications, just "trusting" Anthropic. claude code bots are running on tens of thousands of proprietary code bases that used to be private, and of course they are using all this data to train their model.

    [–] dropdrip@lemmy.ml 16 points 12 hours ago

    It's standard operating practice to steal everything. The world's full of dumb fucks.

    [–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 8 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

    Then people are surprised that claude code gets better at coding

    [–] LH0ezVT@sh.itjust.works 8 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

    Better at replicating closed source software.

    It surely gets better at coding in general, after all there are smart people at anthropic with near limitless budgets, but my conspiracy thesis is that it gets a lot better at replicating stuff it has seen before, but really shouldn't have.

    [–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 4 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

    Meta had an explicit higher price for using their model without retention of prompts for training. This all but confirms your theory.

    [–] dropdrip@lemmy.ml 2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

    Wait... wait... you believe Facebook?

    [–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 3 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

    Oh, facebook will steal the data even if they say they won't. What's interesting is they put a price on blatant prompt copying.

    [–] LH0ezVT@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

    We steal your data: $5 We steal your data and tell you we don't: $10

    [–] Nalivai@lemmy.world 7 points 17 hours ago

    I'm sure it's all but officially confirmed, that all the people upload to it goes to training data unsanitised. And Microslop for sure uploaded entirety of their codebase to all the bots. This is at least part of the reason why claude is so surprisingly OK at reverse-engineering all the big stuff.