Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | what's commentslogin

I don’t think you coined “prompt injection”…

https://simonwillison.net/2022/Sep/12/prompt-injection/

> This isn’t just an interesting academic trick: it’s a form of security exploit. I propose that the obvious name for this should be prompt injection.

I've written about it 142 times since then: https://simonwillison.net/tags/prompt-injection/

I'm credited for coining the term on Wikipedia and in several academic papers.

I don't claim to have discovered the vulnerability - I credited that to Riley Goodside, but we later learned it was independently discovered and first reported to OpenAI by Jonathan Cefalu of Preamble, see https://www.preamble.com/prompt-injection-a-critical-vulnera...


Did this AI hype thot move to substack to try and monetize?

I don't monetize via Substack. I've been using it as a free email newsletter version of my blog for almost three years now - I wrote about how I do that here: https://simonwillison.net/2023/Apr/4/substack-observable/

Bad take. Search engines send people to your site, LLMs don’t.

I visit sites and pages through links I get from an LLM plenty.

You expect the developers of a crawler to look at every site they crawl and develop a specialized crawler for them? That’s fine if you’re only crawling a handful of sites, but absolutely insane if you’re crawling the entire web.

Isn't the point of AI that it's good at understanding content written for humans? Why can't the scrapers run the homepage through an LLM to detect that?

I'm also not sure why we should be prioritizing the needs of scraper writers over human users and site operators.


How is passing a site's homepage to an LLM supposed to make it develop a custom crawler?

It's not, the crawler would use the LLM to read the contents of the first page to dynamically determine the best way to capture the data (e.g. the zip file from TFA).

if you are crawling the entire web, you should respect robots.txt and don't fetch anything disallowed. full stop.

This is probably the reason. It’s more effort to special case every site that offers dumps than to just unleash your generic scraper on it.

What do you use instead… that doesn’t piggyback off of google search?

The AI summaries clearly aren’t bad. I’m not sure what kind of weird shit you search for that you consider the summaries bad. I find them helpful and click through to the cited sources.

...and the cited source is AI generated video(s). There are summaries that say exactly the opposite of the correct result.

Can it make it work on mobile?

Yes, but I didn't bother here (not part of the original prompt).

You're welcome to drop the HTML into a coding agent and tell it to do that. In my experience you usually have to decide how you want that to work - I've had them build me on-screen D-Pad controls before but I've also tried things like getting touch-to-swipe plus an on-screen fire button.


It’s more like the iPhone “you’re holding it wrong”.

Which republican called for a democrat to be killed?

> "SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR FROM TRAITORS!!!" Trump went on. "LOCK THEM UP???" He also called for the lawmakers' arrest and trial, adding in a separate post that it was "SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH."

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/trump-says-democra...


So more broadly, calling for any sort of capital punishment is also "political violence"? Even if you're against capital punishment, comparing it to something like Charlie Kirk getting shot is disingenuous. When people think of "political violence" they're thinking of the former, not capital punishment. Lumping the two together is like "do you support criminals? No? Why do you support Nelson Mandela, a convicted criminal?"

> calling for any sort of capital punishment is also "political violence"?

No, of course not, but I'm sure you knew that, hence constructing this straw man so you can knock it over and claim victory.

However, and more to the actual point, calling for capital punishment strictly because you disagree with the factual words someone chose to write might reasonably be considered "political violence". Especially when the words in question clearly call out your potential political intentions and remind people that said intentions can be battled in a particular way.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: