[TZubiri]

It's very common nowadays to claim that something doesn't have access to X when it does in fact have system level access to X, but the application code just doesn't use X (or a prompt is being asked not to use X).

>curl -fsSL https://paxel.ycombinator.com/upload.sh | bash

Point in case.

Trustworthy people will ask you to give them the right amount of access, they won't ask you for infinite access and ask you to trust them that they won't use it. Would you trust a contractor that asks for root, and your master password when they could have requested a specific user or some specific files?

[tomhow]

Sure - and people are able to audit what the software is doing and call it out if it’s operating in a way that’s unintended or inappropriate, just as has happened here.

Edit:

I’ll add this point as people always seem to want to raise the spectre of YC or the AI platforms stealing people’s code or ideas via these sorts of tools.

The value of any code or ideas is immaterial compared to the value of identifying talented people who can then be offered opportunities such as attending Startup School, being funded by YC, getting jobs at YC-funded companies or YC itself.

It’s one of pg’s oldest dictums, that ideas alone are worthless, and only working products and the people that build them are worth anything. Nobody at YC thinks any differently about that these days.

[TZubiri]

>>Sure - and people are able to audit what the software is doing and call it out if it’s operating in a way that’s unintended or inappropriate, just as has happened here

1. Yes you can audit client side and network interface, but not server side.

2. does 'curl $URL | sh' invite users to audit? Or to trust blindly? It's the equivalent of presenting a contract with 'sign here' stickers and pushing you to sign it quickly like it's nothing. Does not signal trustworthiness.

>I’ll add this point as people always seem to want to raise the spectre of YC or the AI platforms stealing people’s code or ideas via these sorts of tools.

>The value of any code or ideas is immaterial compared to the value of identifying talented people who can then be offered opportunities such as attending Startup School, being funded by YC, getting jobs at YC-funded companies or YC itself.

>It’s one of pg’s oldest dictums, that ideas alone are worthless, and only working products and the people that build them are worth anything. Nobody at YC thinks any differently about that these days.

I do agree and share this point, ideas are worthless. But this doesn't deal with ideas, it deals with code, which as a software startup I don't feel the need to convince you of its value and the risks of leaking it. If you think your code is worthless, close your startup.

By many definitions, prompts are source code, and what we used to call source code is now target code. So this indeed does leak your source code. It's not just an IP blunder to leak your source code this carelessly, but it's a security blunder to do so. "But Kerchoff's principle.." no, Kerchoff's principle is that you should design your system as if source code were public, not that leaking source code has no negative security effect.

Also, is it possible that YC is taking advantage of the 'your ideas are worthless' dictum? Just share your ideas with YC, they are too big to care about your stupid idea. But they are gathering intel on over hundred of thousands of startups, and the ratio of applicants to fundings is continuously going down.

And sharing your idea with a single potential investor, isn't the same thing as submitting your idea (and implementation details), to a system built by people who don't give a shit about internals or security, and that use third party tools and services from different countries to process your data in ways that they don't give a fuck either.

What guarantee do you have that by using YC's vibecode data gathering tool, your data won't end up in a training set that will make it easier for a competitor with the same idea as you to find your solution?

A decade ago maybe your idea was worthless and joining YC was a contrarian bet. Nowadays, this data is clearly worth something, and applying to YC is as mainstream as applying for a job, and both of these mainstream 'apply for a 0.1% chance at the privilege of working with us' tend to grow completely asymmetric and exploit the underdog as much as they allow themselves to be exploited.

[tomhow]

It doesn’t deal with code, it deals with chat transcripts, and only those in the directories you explicitly choose to share (yes I know transcripts include some code but you’re not sharing a working app codebase or anything close to it).

The entire purpose of Startup School for YC is to build great relationships with the most promising talent. The scale and cost of the event is vast, and the benefits for attendees are huge.

It’s a three day event with main-stage interviews with several top figures in the tech world and many other intimate events with YC partners, industry experts and fellow attendees. Much of the effort in organizing the event is maximizing the chances that attendees will meet other attendees with things in common so they can build relationships and maybe work on important projects in the future. Of course, YC hopes to be able to fund the most promising startups that come out of this, but nobody is obligated to apply to YC or take YC funding if it’s offered.

What I’m trying to convey here is that it’s in YC’s utmost interests to build trust and earn respect from the people who are participating in these programs, and there is no way in a million years that some code or implementation detail exposed in a chat transcript is going to be more valuable than building very positive, mutually trusting relationships with all participants and applicants over the long term.

[TZubiri]

>It doesn’t deal with code, it deals with chat transcripts, and only those in the directories you explicitly choose to share (yes I know transcripts include some code but you’re not sharing a working app codebase or anything close to it).

What's more important, the code? or the source?

It's the source. The mistake thousands of people are making is that the source no longer looks like code, and the target code now looks like what source code used to be. They are looking at the aesthetics instead of the fundamentals.

[tomhow]

You ignored the rest of my comment. The maximum theoretical benefit to YC from “stealing” IP or trade secrets from chat transcripts is immaterial, relative to the benefit to YC of finding good talent and building positive, trusting relationships with them over the long term.

It's literally the hardest thing in business for investors and employers by far: finding good talent to invest in or employ, and earning/keeping their trust. YC spends unimaginable amounts of money and effort each year to keep doing that, as it has done for two decades. Startup School is just that latest and biggest example of that.

It doesn't even pass basic logic that YC would steal some gem of an idea from someone's transcript and hand it to someone else to build. Everyone who is talented enough to build it is busy building products based on their own ideas, and the very best person to build a product is the person who had the idea to build it.

[TZubiri]

One of the threat models is not YC itself stealing your IP. Which they are to some extent, but them using vendors that themselves train their models on your IP. Or vendors that use vendors that...

>YC spends unimaginable amounts of money and effort each year to keep doing that, as it has done for two decades.

Yeah, that or they built their reputation early on and are now coasting on that. It's an industry whose explicit objective is to build companies (build reputations) and then exit and sell them, would you be surprised if YC itself did that?

>It doesn't even pass basic logic that YC would steal some gem of an idea from someone's transcript and hand it to someone else to build.

More likely is the opposite, they get 100k startup applications and they know what ideas people are pursuing and should be avoided, and which might be worth looking into. The former become would target demographics for shovel selling as well, so the 1% that actually gets into YC might setup shop selling to the other 99%. It's theoretical, but these are all attacks that emerge from the basic violation of sharing your source code. To be clear, I don't think that YC employees are starting startups, the threat model is that they act through their picks, and they strengthen their picks at the expense of their non-picks. It's like a russian roulette of startups, which isn't necessarily a bad idea.

>Everyone who is talented enough to build it is busy building products based on their own ideas,

Like, I get that, but also don't overcorrect into the naïve take that market intelligence is worthless or doesn't exist, especially when that take is 20 years old, if you treat that as your strategic advantage over the population, it's more likely that it's going to be used to take advantage of you.

Be moderate, share your idea, don't share everything. Share to individuals, don't share to massive data gathering systems that may use your data as training data for machine learning models. Basic stuff really.