this post was submitted on 13 May 2026
56 points (90.0% liked)

Technology

84603 readers
4148 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] tinsuke@lemmy.world 12 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Why?

Google added that it doesn't believe its own Gemini models were used, but still has "high confidence" an AI model was part of discovering the vulnerability and weaponizing an exploit.

No, really, why? If Google itself or their models didn't discover the vulnerability, how would they know genAI was used on the discovery of the vulnerability and weaponization (interestingly, not "creation") of an exploit?

[–] KuroiKaze@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

Google and all large companies employ a fleet of both fte security researchers and 3rd party security firms to constantly stay on the edge of security threats. They constantly are looking at artifacts from the wild and white papers etc

[–] HeartyOfGlass@piefed.social 0 points 7 hours ago

Because it makes the big line go up. Anything to prove that "AI" is anything other than a dumb series of if/then statements.

[–] dan1101@lemmy.world 9 points 10 hours ago

Generative AI didn't make anything, it just retrieved indexed code that already existed.

[–] patruelis@lemmy.world 26 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

There will be many more made because of AI.

[–] BorgDrone@feddit.nl 24 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

They sell you the AI to create the buggy code, and then they sell you more AI to fix the bugs. Amazing. Just think of the amount of profit for the shareholders.

[–] overload@sopuli.xyz 7 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Not if you're the shareholder of a company suffering from a zero day exploit.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

They should've paid for "AI" to protect them from the "AI" attacking them.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 8 hours ago

There will be many more made because of ~~AI~~ computers

"AI" doesn't exist, but computers will continue to compute.

[–] unitedwithme@lemmy.today 7 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

Google circa 2002: "Don't be evil"

Google 2026: "Try to be slightly less evil than the top 5 evil things combined"

[–] pomegranatefern@sh.itjust.works 5 points 8 hours ago

In retrospect, it's kind of wild how many of us (myself sadly included) actually believed Google's "Don't be evil" thing instead of seeing it as a "My "Not involved in human trafficking" T-shirt has people asking a lot of questions already answered by my shirt." situation.

[–] Emotional_Engi@lemmy.zip 3 points 10 hours ago

If you are powerful and evil, you use your power to redefine what evil is.

[–] webkitten@piefed.social 8 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Google being nothing more than an AI slop factory these days makes sense given how terrible Android is now.

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 3 points 10 hours ago

I think there's some confusion around the title. Google found that someone was using AI to identify exploits. Google itself is not announcing that AI made something that has a zero day exploit.

Seems like the exploiter was using Google's AI to try and find exploits and that's probably what alerted them.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

made with AI

Fake. "AI" doesn't exist. There's no need to even read these articles when the headline alone is straight bullshit.

But if you read the article, it gets even phonier, This is just another example of supposedly generated code which is absolutely nothing new. But they don't really know. The grifter headline states speculation as fact.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 7 hours ago

Denying that AI exists when you know exactly what is being talked about is quite the choice.