If I’m being honest, I don’t think Grok posts deserve attention here. This isn’t news; we already know Grok is shit because LLMs are shit and Elon is extremely shit. We really don’t need reminders.

All this does is draw people’s attention to more slop and hate, same as they’ve been seeing all year. That’s not just unimportant, it’s unhealthy.

FUD

What is this, a crypto forum? You make it sound like they’re trying to single-handedly tear down GrapheneOS or something.

As time goes ever onward, I find myself increasingly in the position of using Firefox solely because it isn’t Chromium, rather than because of any inherent good quality.

Which is not to say that Firefox isn’t still at least fine as a browser. But this is what Mozilla is now, and if there’s anything the leaders of that organization are doing, it is that they are committing corporate suicide because none of those idiots know their foot from their mouth. Firefox can’t stay decent with money-men at the helm.

I swear, getting a business major should be considered self-harm.

Alright, lemme try to explain this:

1. You stated you don’t care about FFmpeg.
2. Someone asked why and stated it was useful.
3. You brought up “bad journalism” in response, implying your lack of care for FFmpeg was due to the article not describing why it was useful.
4. To refute your accusation of bad journalism, I pointed out the first paragraph of the article, which directly makes a case for FFmpeg and which you seemed to have missed.
5. You somehow seem to think I’m defending FFmpeg in some fashion, thus missing my point. (Also, you seem to be calling FFmpeg a “format,” presumably because it has “mpeg” in the name? FFmpeg handles a litany of formats.)

The author has not done bad journalism. You just missed stuff while reading. That’s fine so long as you address it. I would ask you not insult me for pointing this out, though.

You seem to be under the impression that AI is a good tool for finding undiscovered security bugs. It’s not. It’s a crapshoot that requires a ton of extra effort to verify. Using it to find bugs wastes time and has a high risk of side-effects, given that AI has no understanding and thus cannot know if an issue is important, if fixing it has unwanted implications, or if there even is one at all. And if you’re going to try to solve that with human supervision, then you may as well just have the human do the review to begin with and leave the AI out of it.

Bad journalism has nothing to do with this. Literal first paragraph of the article:

You may never have heard of FFmpeg, but you’ve used it. This open source program’s robust multimedia framework is used to process video and audio media files and streams across numerous platforms and devices. It provides tools and libraries for format conversion, aka transcoding, playback, editing, streaming, and post-production effects for both audio and video media.

If you weren’t paying attention until someone pointed out your error, just say that. We won’t crucify you.

Better suggestion: Stop using AI to do any of this shit. Security research and vulnerability patching should not be reliant upon de facto black-box random number generators.