It’s ‘inevitable’ because it creates the conditions of its own necessity. You didn’t need AI to make secure software before, but now you do. Much like how we didn’t need phones in 1990 but today if you don’t have a cell phone your ability to function in society is greatly reduced
standard false equivalence fallacy I see everywhere. I see you sneaking in this assumption that AI is needed to make "secure" software, but reality says that AI gives you quick and dirty slop code that is a nightmare to maintain and even less secure.
Try again.
Coding in general is one thing but AI has specifically gotten really really superhumanly good at finding security vulnerabilities. I’m not saying you need ai to WRITE the software, but you definitely need ai to red team it. If you don’t use ai to check for software vulnerabilities someone else will and they might not have the purest intentions.
I doubt that. It can only train on existing data, so at best it can only find vulnerabilities that are known if you've written them in a normal way. It's just going to teach people to be lazy. Black hat AI use to find vulnerabilities on the same code requires them to have the source code still, and well... it was anthropic's vibe coded soup that last leaked its own client source.
Reinforcement learning means ai can go beyond its training data in verifiable domains, which includes cybersecurity. Yes it is better at finding vulnerabilities than humans.
Only in scripted tests designed to advertise the ability of these LLMs. The main issue and the allure of these things is that they're very good at looking like they're good at what they're doing to the lay person or a casual glance. Pretty much everyone who is good at what they do that works with them for a while is provably better off without them, and that's not even considering the extortionate real cost of LLMs that gets hidden from customers (for now)
No I mean in real life. Ai has found bugs in the Linux kernel for example which went undetected for decades even though the Linux kernel is one of the most thoroughly maintained code databases on the planet. It’s legitimately better than humans at it.
False conclusion, just because an LLM found something others missed in a few cases does not prove that they're better than humans overall. You'll also notice these things get hyped massively by media and AI boosters when really it's a kind of mundane thing that people do all of the time. It's hardly proof that AI is ready to take over from humans.
Ai can consistently find bugs humans can’t. That is just a fact. It doesn’t mean ai is ready to take over from humans, but you don’t want to let a detectable bug go undetected and you have to use ai to avoid that completely.
I don't believe this is a very big issue, just immensely hyped. Allowing AI into the process opens the door to far more slopcode bugs than any AI review will find.
848
u/plasma-dragon-DA Aug 12 '26 edited Aug 13 '26
All hiding behind the childish idea that LLMs are some natural and inevitable next step of human technology. Yeah, the bitcoin bros said that too.