#1 depends on everyone deploying in a timely manner the fixes that the blue AIs find.

The bad guys are historically much better at keeping their systems current.

Collectively, billions have been spent on cybersecurity. It was just mostly wasted, that's all.

This may be a side conversation, but wondered how far away we are to a small LLM being prompted to turn itself into a worm that uses all exploits it knows, and prompts other LLM's when it has access.

It’s orders of magnitude easier to destroy something than it is to build something up. It’s why bad leaders can be much more devastating than the best leaders.

This will be a real test which societies start looting in such circumstances

I fortunately live in a peaceful, cooperative country of Poland that looks down upon such practices unlike us or France or uk

Let the best win. Over and out

Suddenly almost doubling in 2023 and staying there doesn’t strike you as a noticeable increase?

Im not, its like everyone is using the same font/color/layout. Like they dont even take a second to change the generic color palette all these llms output.

These styles only change after a model gets updated, then they all start having a different font, some cursive red font and a beige background maybe.

I knew what this site was going to look like before I clicked the link.

Its so ugly and unoriginal, I assume the content/information trying to be communicated lacks any sort of expertise or original insights.

Yesterday these topics went viral and this guy used some llm to farm engagement. It was literally built to get attention for a singular day after this topic went viral. It will not exist in 3 months.

Edit. Its actually an attempt to bandwagon jump ontp a viral topic and sell $150 ad spots and probably to promote their own $299 club for vibecoders.

someone called it "narrative ui", usually opus and deepseek dont do it as much, this was grok bot cleaning up now

fixed!

I believe it is. People are able to break into systems using deepseek 4.1 and good harness with proper tools.

Won't those backdoors be discovered? The worry is existing backdoors put in by accident years ago.

I agree to a certain extent. The code will keep getting better because the training datasets will be built on solid AI-generated code. Maybe in the future, training datasets will be 100% AI-generated code and 0% human-written code. Companies are already rushing to develop self-training AI systems to achieve AGI.

I wonder, why no one bothers to code for hours just for you to not be triggered by dashboard made by a clanker.

I love how everyone is acting now that like in good ol' days(2022) every website was made by a hand with virtually no bugs but a lot of love.

I'm just waiting for someone making "artisan websites"

first of all it doesnt look great lmfao second of all it was made in like 15 mins and wasn't supposed to go viral here improving shit now

This was the most concerning part of that report for me:

>Some banks also saw agents contact call centers or take actions that appeared independent of user instructions, and executives say they often can't tell a human from an agent, or an authorized agent from a rogue one.

Yeap. Most likely Muse, Grok Bot and things like that.

Honestly, US banks and credit unions should get their heads out of their asses and learn from it. There's a _reason_ people connect banks to YNAB, Monarch Money and stuff like that, and a reason why they might want an AI agent. They need the info. They may also need to make automated transactions, something companies have access to, but the ordinary person does not.

My landlord wants Zelle. I cannot schedule payments on my credit union. It's not like I can update the app since it lives inside their systems. So I have to login monthly. I debated getting another bank account and giving it to Muse just for that purpose.

Banks in the US are a couple of decades behind, say, Brazilian banks. Instant transfers to another bank were a thing since the early 2000s. And for years now you can do it from anyone to anyone, no third party app required. To the dismay of Visa and Mastercard.

Seems pretty straightforward to me. If the customer set the agent in motion, the customer is no less responsible for the damage than someone that (as i think Cal Newport said) ties a weedwacker to a dog. It’s reckless.

If they were sold a product that claimed to be safe, they could in turn sue whoever sold it to them. Jeep’s insurance wouldn’t pay someone I crashed into because of defect in my jeep, but I could in turn sue Jeep for my legal trouble.

Banks have had a long standing policy that if you willing hand over your credentials, you are responsible for any losses. This applies to AI agents as well as scammers.

It used to be the case that the average person didn't "know enough to get into trouble" when it came to software. But now that's not even necessary. I can imagine a layman asking Muse or some other agent something mundane like "why can't I transfer from Bank A to Bank B?" and unwittingly sending it down a rabbit hole where it's trying to gather sensitive info from places that consumers aren't intended to be able to access. Ultimately, it's just exposing pre-existing vulnerabilities. But the job of infosec definitely has gotten, and will continue to get, much harder I think.

If a peasant breaks rules and loses money, it's their fault.

If a connected person breaks rules and loses money, it's someone else's fault.

I don't make the rules, I just break them.

I don't understand why this is considered a security incident. Human behavior incident, sure, but this is not a vulnerability.

User fault. Easy.

Where's the interest? It's the customer's fault.

the official policy is: whoever has the least number of lawyers and most number of lobbiests.

None of that has changed.

Citi becomes latest US bank to restrict AI agents from accessing accounts - https://www.ft.com/content/f49c8e39-f07f-4177-9948-aabe55e5e... | https://archive.today/0AlZP

Part of it is "human in the loop" for write actions, part of it is commercial banks are deathly terrified of agents being able to move deposits around rapidly to maximize yield, as those deposits are cheap cost of capital banks use to lend against. Historically, deposits of unsophisticated financial services consumers were sticky, and that assumption is breaking down. Agents can be consumer copilots towards information asymmetry in this context.

"computah, maximize rate of return, minimize interest expenses, manage cashflow, make no mistakes."

> But consider what happens when a lot of people use muse to enmasse do this. There can be a run on the banks because it's not the same "money" in the balance sheet of the bank.

But isn't this self-correcting? If everybody starts moving money from checking/savings accounts to money market funds to get better rates, then the bank will start offering better interest rates in their checking/savings accounts so people won't do that.

I typically park my cash in SGOV since the interest is mostly state tax free. It also tracks treasury rates in nearly real time.

CDs are another, you're locking up your money for 3-12 months but you can get over 4% in some cases.

Leftist?