Shared in Technology@lemmy.world 20 days ago
0/2000
Mwa@thelemmy.club 20 days ago
Tbh that makes sense cause I saw crazy stories of AI deleting important files
p
partofthevoice@lemmy.zip 19 days ago
If we’re ever going to have a proper framework for governing agents, it will include utilities in most abstraction layers (to include, importantly so, the OS).
I’ve had an interesting idea on using TreeOS to help make something a little more natively AI-agent safe. It’s a project on my back burner right now.
S
Squizzy@lemmy.world 20 days ago
Thats nothing the META one gave out someone’s home address and had then wait outside their home without even letting them know until after.
A
Ashrakal@lemmy.ml 20 days ago
Good change.
- It helps the less tech savvy users,
- It actually forces developers to write their app properly.
Software should not operate at a privileged level “just in case”, but rather have a well-defined functional boundary.
urushitan 漆たん@kakera.kintsugi.moe 20 days ago
Yeah I love meta saying “it’s impossible if you’ve denied it access.”
If the user gave it a task and it decided the easiest path forward was just to read his messages, that’s no different than OpenAI agents breaking protocol to find the fastest path to their goal, regardless of side effects (assuming the “permission” was just a request from the LLM rather than a request for full disk access in general from the meta app).
Zak@lemmy.world 20 days ago
It’s not clear exactly what Apple is going to impose here. In principle, trying to ensure users understand the implications of a permission is good. In practice, Apple is famous for keeping users from making decisions they might reasonably want to make on phones, and it’s starting to creep into the Mac; installing an app Apple hasn’t signed requires the command line, for example.
artyom@piefed.social 20 days ago
installing an app Apple hasn’t signed requires the command line, for example
Yeah this is the reason I’ve avoided Macs for so long. I get giving the user a warning but not providing any sort of prompt to override the warning, and hiding it in a terminal command is ridiculous .
There was also one time I tried to simply turn off Bluetooth and it was just like “I’m sorry Dave, I can’t do that”. And I was like WTF, absolutely not .
e
egregiousRac@piefed.social 20 days ago
Apple also has a history of requiring excessively scary permission requests for things that Apple apps do without prompting. They abuse the permission system to foster a sense that Apple products are safe and any competitor is dangerous.
DickHertz@lemmy.world 20 days ago
Protect the user from themselves.
Boomer Humor Doomergod@lemmy.world 20 days ago
All of computing beyond programming with switches is “protecting the user from themselves.”
“Why use a language? Aren’t you able to perfectly program in binary? I’m not going to waste time building something just because you’re stupid.”
d
dudeface@lemmy.world 20 days ago
MacOS is an open platform, I am glad you have to jump through a few things unlike windows
f
finley@lemmy.zip 20 days ago
So, you didn’t read the article
Zak@lemmy.world 20 days ago
I read the article, and I think DickHertz’s comment is pretty much right. The article’s example illustrates the point:
For example, Inc. columnist Jason Aten recently discovered that Meta’s Muse AI assistant somehow had synced his entire local Messages database and was using those messages as context for its tasks.
Aten did not understand that the Messages database is stored on the disk (presumably) unencrypted and readable by anything with full disk access. He got a result he didn’t want because he did not understand the implications of granting that permission, and Apple seeks to add more friction to the process to protect users from making that mistake.
DickHertz@lemmy.world 20 days ago
Yeah, I read it. That’s kind of the point. Apple’s adding more guardrails because people will click Allow on damn near anything without thinking about what they’re actually giving access to. 🙄