@TheEntity @scottjenson @molly0xfff The protection...

The protection is that it's bad with numbers. So people will ask it what your finances are, but it will confabulate different numbers.

OK, I'm just kidding, and it's pretty darned dark humor, but it raises another key issue: We sometimes analyze the risk today by saying "well, there's no way to make use of that now" but then someone makes an unrelated change that means there is a way, and then we don't go back and re-review the things we've let through.

So if we did stupidly rely on how bad these LLMs are with numbers and decide it was OK to see our financials, and then someone fixed its math, we'd have a danger we'd already let through. And it might not be obvious that the thing creating the danger was "We fixed math."

Like 21 May at 21:54 | Wall-to-wall | Open on climatejustice.social

4 comments

Entitas

@kentpitman i read this three times and have no idea what you're saying or how it's a reply to me

22 May at 1:46 | Open on social.treehouse.systems

Kent Pitman

@TheEntity

Probably because I thought your response was sarcasm, not literal. :)

Most people are in the opposite position, where there are tons of ways their data can leave their machine and they never know.

Given current tech, even if an LLM were armed with my financial data, the present state of the art might not be able to actually regurgitate it. It seems terrible with math. But that can't hold.

I hope that clarifies it. If not, well, just ignore me. :)

22 May at 5:58 | Open on climatejustice.social

Entitas

@kentpitman Here's a crazy idea: What if it wasn't an LLM getting your financial data off the Windows 11 Spyware App, but just some guy, who can read it and understand it and know how to use it to steal your shit.

22 May at 15:55 | Open on social.treehouse.systems

Kent Pitman

@TheEntity

Oh definitely. So much more to be said on nuance but another time.

22 May at 17:58 | Open on climatejustice.social