|
|
|
|
|
by jdw64
1 hour ago
|
|
What is more frightening about this than safe C assembly is that this level of implementation is achievable not with a SOTA model, but with a cost effective model like KIMI. There was human judgment involved in the middle, but reading the article, My reading of the process is as follows: 1.A developer identified the necessity of inline assembly. 2.Defined the safety boundaries for 'memory-safe' inline assembly. 3.Established strict policies for memory access. 4.Curated an allowlist of permissible instructions. 5.Set rigorous test criteria and 'done' conditions. In short, with the overall guardrails in place, a sub agent loop was run, and this level of code was produced. This raises a number of interesting points about how we should use AI. I haven't looked at all the code, but the idea of passing assembly through safe zones without memory access, and using that as a foundation to achieve this level of implementation through AI, is quite impressive |
|