> if you're not seeing dramatic change, I suspect you're not looking

If the people claiming that everything has changed were even a fraction as productive as they think, then it would be visible even to people who weren't looking.

As it is, a lot of people are actively looking but still not seeing it.

▲

qarl2 35 minutes ago | parent [-]

I'm curious - do you understand how hard decompilation from machine code is?

In 2 weeks I've built a system to do exactly that. Autonomously.

https://github.com/qarl/arcade-js

If you can't see this - you should probably get your eyes checked.

EDIT: It's doing TimePilot right now. You watch the progress in the commits.

▲

chaps 6 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

"you should probably get your eyes checked."

Don't be a jerk. A lot of people have had bad experiences with these systems from people basically saying exactly what you're saying. This "you should get your eyes checked" mentality is pervasive with the nerds who confidently say that their analysis is solid when it's... not. It's a big problem in communities that have non-conventional videogame puzzles for example. Someone will come in, announce some novel solution.... leading to a four hour fight about the efficacy of LLMs, only to find a mistake in their code the next day.. never to be seen again.

Mind you, I'm not saying that these systems aren't great at reverse engineering and whatnot. They're spectacularly good at that. But RE is a relatively constrained problem because everything is still right in front of you. For complicated problems where the signal is mixed between noise... less so.

▲

overgard 10 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm sure it's useful for that, but we've had pretty good decompilers before AI.

	▲	qarl2 4 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I would love for you to cite a single one. It must take a binary executable and derive English names for the memory addresses.

▲

Planktonne 16 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

I'm pleased for you, but these tools have been out for many, many weeks, and there are many, many people claiming incredible productivity gains.

Where's the rest of it?

▲

qarl2 10 minutes ago | parent [-]

I just showed you something that would have been considered a miracle one year ago.

And your response was "So what - show me another one."

	▲	Planktonne 2 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I'm not disputing that it's a hard thing to do, but we had decompilers before; "miracle" is rather stretching it. Even granting that framing though, the claimed increase in productivity isn't a one-off, but asserted for everyone using them; you're claiming mass-produced miracles but trying to depend on a single example.