[WJW]

Security minded programmers understand that. "People" as a whole have not even heard about mixing instructions and data, and certainly not the reasons why it is not a good idea.

And AI chatbots are very much targeted at the second group, not the first.

[TeMPOraL]

> "People" as a whole have not even heard about mixing instructions and data, and certainly not the reasons why it is not a good idea.

Because it's not a concept in the real world. Physical reality has no such separation, and neither do human minds.

Tell people you're discussing a board game or some sport, then they'll understand - other than bureaucracy (scary!) and school (traumatic!), that's the one kind of artificial system with rules affording for code/data separation that general population has most experience dealing with.

[NegativeLatency]

Even engineers like doing it sometimes. The old telephone system was so hackable because of in band signaling.

[dylan604]

Some physical constraints do not allow for the best security, and those physical constraints will always win out in the real world. When presented with the pick two of three options of fast, cheap, secure/done right, fast and cheap will always win out.

[DANmode]

The “new” phone system (SS7) still relies on implicit trust and a lack of security.

[iamacyborg]

> And AI chatbots are very much targeted at the second group, not the first.

I suppose this is why the AI labs are famously not releasing developer-oriented tools.

[WJW]

Meta adding an AI chat window in whatsapp and Microsoft adding copilot in every word document was not done with developers in mind, which is why they're missing a lot of power user features that they'd surely have if they were targeted at developers.

You're mistaking the majority of what you see (like Claude et al) with the majority of stuff that is out there. The vast majority of ChatGPT, CoPilot and Gemini users are not developers and will never be.

[bigfishrunning]

> The vast majority of ChatGPT, CoPilot and Gemini users are not developers and will never be.

I agree, but some of them sure like to pretend!

[andrewflnr]

There's a (terrifyingly) large number of developers who don't qualify as "security-oriented programmers".