undefined

points

[-]

Everyone is free to be as snooty as they like. If a report is harder to read/understand/validate because the author just yolo'ed it with an LLM, that's on the report author, not on the maintainers.

It's not okay to foist work onto other people because you don't think LLM slop is a problem. It is absolutely a problem, and no amount of apologizing and pontificating is going to change that.

Grow up and own your work. Stop making excuses for other people. Help make the world better, not worse. It's obvious that LLMs can be useful for this purpose, so people should use them well and make the reports useful. Period.

by tptacek2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Try to make this sentiment coherent. "It's not OK to foist work onto other people". Ok, sure, I won't. The vulnerability still exists. The maintainers just don't get to know about it. I do, I guess. But not them: telling them would "make the world worse".

by parliament323 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

> There's no such thing as a "slop vulnerability"

https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2025/07/14/death-by-a-thousand-s...

See the list at the bottom of the post for examples.

by tptacek3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Those aren't vulnerabilities. You're missing the point.

Nobody is saying there's no such thing as a slop report. Not only are there, but slop vulnerability reports as a time-consuming annoying phenomenon predate LLM chatbots by almost a decade. There's a whole cottage industry that deals with them.

Or did. Obsolete now.