I’m trying to feel more comfortable using random GitHub projects, basically.

  • TootSweet@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    19 days ago

    I don’t think “AI” is going to add anything (positive) to such a use case. And if you remove “AI” as a requirement, you’ll probably get more promising candidates than if you restrict yourself to “AI” (whatever that means) solutions.

    • unknowing8343@discuss.tchncs.deOP
      0·
      19 days ago

      I don’t care if the solution is AI based or not, indeed.

      I guess I thought it like that because AI is quite fit for the task of understanding what might be the purpose of code in a few seconds/minutes without you having to review it. I don’t know how some non-AI tool could be better for such task.

      Edit: so many people against the idea. Have you guys used GitHub Copilot? It understands the context of your repo to help you write the next thing… Right? Well, what if you apply the same idea to simply review for malicious/unexpected behaviour on third party repos? Doesn’t seem too weird for me.

      • TootSweet@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        19 days ago

        AI is quite fit for the task of understanding what might be the purpose of code

        Disagree.

        I don’t know how some non-AI tool could be better for such task.

        ClamAV has been filling a somewhat similar use case for a long time, and I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone call it “AI”.

        I guess bayesian filters like email providers use to filter spam could be considered “AI” (though old-school AI, not the kind of stuff that’s such a bubble now) and may possibly be applicable to your use case.