| ▲ | silveraxe93 7 hours ago | |||||||
from your paper: > Overall, we find that participants who had access to an AI assistant based on OpenAI's codex-davinci-002 model wrote significantly less secure code than those without access. That model came out in March 2022, it's GPT-3.5 !!! I'm sorry but it's absurd to use that as evidence for anything related to AI coding today. You can't just hedge by saying "it's somewhat older". It's like discussing dunno a new train connection between cities and citing a paper measure steam locomotives. | ||||||||
| ▲ | CER10TY 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
Hence why I said the studies here are quite old, and I'd like to see something more recent, though I guess it'll be some time before that's done. I think most people writing code with AI nowadays will find it's still lacking in some areas. Not because the model isn't good (definitely miles ahead than what we had access to in 2022-2023), just because it wasn't actively mentioned and so the model skipped over it. The same will apply to security. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | tytho 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
I agree that we can’t compare older models to newer ones, but how much code was generated during those months/years when the models weren’t good at secure code? How much is still running publicly today? It’s still worth considering the impact to the overall ecosystem. | ||||||||
| ||||||||