upvote
I'd actually feel pretty safe with a LLM project if spec'd against the protocol documentation as opposed to a rookie's handcoded implementation. If security is the concern, I don't think using random reimplements is very safe to begin with.
reply
I'd actually feel pretty safe with a LLM project

Same. I had a couple LLM's rewrite, harden an anonymous image board. It's not popular but exposed to the internet and the Tor network. Not worried at all.

reply
This is a false choice. You can pick neither and for all you know you're picking both.
reply
Unless the model changes and messes half the code base on next iteration. Or Anthropic decides to A/B test your agent.

Or when shit goes sideways and someone actually needs to take a human look at the BF s. I’d rather have the guy who manually with human eyes read the specs.

reply
> Something that is supposed to be very private and secure

Not sure how using an LLM for development of the tool has any affect on this. From a security perspective, I think that would've had more validity a year or two ago, but these days, I'd argue LLMs practice better security in generated code on average than a normal developer.

From the privacy angle, I have no idea how having an AGENTS.md (for development purposes) has any impact on privacy.

I don't want to "burn [your] karma to the ground", I just want to understand this angle, because I'm not sure I see how it applies.

reply
Do you not use AI for coding?
reply
> Do you not use AI for coding?

A lot of people prefer to understand the things they ship. I don't understand why this remains surprising to some.

reply