> reach for, a Rust extension does the work

ai; dr, sorry

it probably is AI written

but it's a bit strange

It's too "clunky" for AI, like you stumble too much over the words when reading

If we take the first sentence that could have been from a German person, where such language structures aren't that uncommon.

I myself write a lot like that, and always have written like that, often in way worse ways, like sentences which never, not even after docent of words, end, and have levels of sub-sentence nesting no normal thinking human would want to read. (<- yes that was intentional. I tend to write more concise today.)

Through there are indicators of AI usage in pretty much every single sentence.

But at the same time the writing is too bad, for most current AI agents.

Like reading it is hard, in ways AI tends to not mess up. There are missing filler and glue words. Including some cases where I think they are probably grammatically require (through school was too long ago, so idk.). Sometimes it looks like a different language construct was used (like bracket or -- hyphen inlays) which then where search+replaced with commas.

So I really wonder what that is?

- a lower quality LLM Model?

- AI written text modified by hand leading to it having the worst of both worlds?

- or a human who has self learned English as a second language using AI and believes this is how normal English speakers write ...

and the last option is kinda frightening, because sooner or later we will have exactly that: People who write like AI "but worse" and likely do not even realize what they are doing.

---

EDIT/PS: Side note; Rust in Python is a decent match. PyO3 is far from perfect but decently usable. Spreading more awareness about it is nice. This comment is only about the writing structure not the content of the blog post.

No less than Shazam is?

Pangram flags it. It also talks about "quietly" and "the gap". It's AI.

ai; dr, sorry

If there's a machine that automatically turns electricity into proofs then mathematics becomes a different thing altogether.

Today, maybe. Where's the law of nature that says it won't be generating novel insights in two years? Five? Ten?

If AI can generate questions and then answer them, what are the people for?

If humans can shovel dirt, then what are the ants for?

> I chained this bug with an n-day sandbox escape and flagged the v8CTF.

https://serotav.github.io/Writeups/v8/when-sorting-leads-to-...

I believe that means the v8 sandbox, not a renderer sandbox, based on the v8CTF reference.

Then what it was chained to is the real issue, not this one. The entire point of having webpages run in their own process is to prevent bugs like this one from doing worse. If you're claiming this bug is the bug that matters, you're effectively claiming they shouldn't need to run pages in their own process and just trust that there are zero bugs. No major browser does that. Not Firefox, not Safari, and not Chromium.

that's why bugs in the webpage process pay out very little. Without a worse 2nd bug, they are less serious. Bugs that let you RCE outside the webpage process pay much higher.

Sophisticated attacks will always leverage multiple vulnerabilities. That’s why you have to think of any vulnerability holistically, not in isolation.

Then just call them both one exploit that allows arbitrary sandbox escape.

A similar site, also LLM-assisted, that does a better and more evocative job of composing stories.

https://random-lives.github.io/random-lives/

> The subsequent creation of bigger explosions by packing more fissile material does not meaningfully improve the technology.

That's not a great summary of what happened with the invention of the H-bomb.