testerteert000a

Security lead who is leaving the industry more or less to specialize in offense and otherwise get the heck out of the way of this trainwreck, another post asked the right question

> Why aren't we seeing catastrophic GLM-enabled hacks every day now?

Why aren't we? Truly, why aren't we? I think we saw the start of it the last 8 months with the waves of critical npm vulns, and the general tier of average phishing is better than it was.

But, the open question that should be in everyone's mind, and is in many security pro's minds are, when you pair it with the macro topics that can drive escalation:

- The capability to do serious impact clearly exists now

- When is it time for my company, my water treatment plant, my network-connected car as part of a broader fleet control mechanism, to be on the receiving end of this?

The problem, while your data is probably accurate enough conceptually, is that DCs showed up too late to the scene - the water isn't accounted for.

DCs, new golf, new homes, new alfalfa, new ranching - the math isn't there.

Tech people saying ignore the water problems are saying implicitly that AI, despite showing up late in line for access to a resource that's an old, old problem in the western US, is more important than hearth and home considerations fighting for the same dwindling resource.

The average western farmer/rancher, their own judgement and contributions to this problem aside, definitely love coastal tech people sniping their pre-colorado compact water rights via all that goes into getting water rights like that.

But when datacenter purchases by Meta are buying pre-colorado compact water rights for the DCs, you can tell what you need to know on how the DC builders treat the short term water risk.

Simply untrue, assume you don't live out there

Do any of those books include 101 climate change or Cadillac Desert.

Because "the water thing" is make or break for for the southwest, which includes LA, and LA's water system includes NorCal consequences, and California water issues include all-country impacts due to the farming there.

If you haven't been paying attention to the "water thing," that doesn't mean it's not serious af.

You must not live in a planet-burned spot yet. But, direct experience shouldn't be the only way to build empathy for viewpoints that aren't yours.

If you develop LLM-driven exploits that can work through a water treatment/ purification system, looks an awful lot the same.

> ...I see how no-guardrails LLMs could be truly disastrous...

by all accounts this is what's what because of how...

> You can do CRISPR in your kitchen.

.. and because of the same dynamic we see occurring in cybersec.

If you're good enough at cybersec, but not good-good at specific skillsets like offensive, then LLMs and a comp sci degree makes you quite capable in the ways that count. This is a fact, full stop.

If you're good enough at biology and have certain ideologies, but not good-good at specific skillsets like genetic engineering in your kitchen, do LLMs get you good enough? Does the impact on cybersec transfer over to this domain? H

Hard to say, but it has enough risk indicators for me to think the pushback against these possibilities is the height of otherwise talented engineers being myopic.

If good enough at biology can include all the PhD programs across all the world, and you pair other known events like cartels and terrorism groups hiring chemistry PhDs from University of Unemployed Chemistry PhDs, then the next logical extension of that theme with this tech is intense.

Agreed, it's a hard job.

I think what is most relevant to me these days:

- When I explain to my family, peers, and the endstate about what I did with my time during working years, I'd like to be able to answer it in a certain way. I stopped being able to answer it in that way by staying in tech, I realized.

- Things over the "months to years" cycle look bad-bad. Shorthand described as I lived through 2008, AI on a timeline looks a heck of a lot like that, and I'd take a morale toll if that's the only toll I end up paying from 2026-2035.

Excluding a NP path ($200k+ within a decade of RN licensure if you want it), and factoring in shortages - RN as a team lead makes ~$130k w/ ~4-5 yrs per the CBA I know of. That's without overtime or nights, without a new CBA factoring in the 2020's inflation and shortages after COVID era departures.

NP further swings the math, to include the tuition costs baked in from a cheap in-state school, employer tuition support, and specializing in demand areas like psych.

I suggest you look at where nurses unions are nationwide, and their collective bargaining agreements! Nurse unions aren't just in blue states named California.

Agreed! Stress in exchange for daily care outcomes I know I did and blood-and-guts adrenaline work has longed ticked the boxes. Tech used to tick the other boxes that I don't care much about anymore especially post AI.

Being the early saturator is the best I could come up with

After decades of clicking on different spots on screens and keyboards, the real stress in exchange for that, and now your peers in AI companies have found a way to unemploy you - there's a lot to like with hands on care that does something tangible that tech rarely does.

me and you both! i had a big tech job, made enough/seen enough to read the writing on the wall and plus having a way to exit, off to RN before others do.

3x12 hrs on 4x days off, or 6 on/8 off, TC pushes into mid/high 100's a few years in, often a union job, hands on outcomes, adrenaline if you want it, AI-protected enough (see: often a union job).

Lot of nurse converts soon I think.

> all of the recent academic literature

The academic literature funded by what grants from what stakeholders? Like the social media research from Harvard Kennedy now? The research that came after its social media research lead was fired and a $500mm Chan Zuckerberg Initiative grant occurred somehow in parallel [0] [1]?

That recent research?

Or the research that was occurring on social media before that? Surely you're not arguing in that bad of faith, despite where I could speculate your RSUs might have came from. But this seems an extremely naive take if not made in bad faith.

[0] https://www.thecrimson[.]com/article/2023/2/2/donovan-forced... [1] https://www.npr[.]org/2023/12/04/1217086770/disinformation-r...