ekns

Today I was thinking that for many programs, you could probably formulate some restrictions on what exactly they should be able to do using LLMs (access home/dotfiles/secrets, network, etc.)

It's cumbersome to set up the configuration for exactly the "expected" capabilities (at least I never bother). So I was wondering, could one do something like trapping syscalls and using LLM as an exception handler for each category, until a complete profile is built for the program. After that, there should be no overhead for the LLM/sandboxer.

The top-level input would be something like "foo is a multiplayer game" or "baz is like youtube-dl".

I've been pondering on and off again how best to avoid ending up in some kafkaesque algorithmic loop where your gmail account, domain name, etc. are suddenly blocked by the registrar for unspecified reasons with little to no way to resolve the situation, as has happened to "many" here.

I thought Cloudflare would be pretty good, out of the non-enterprise priced options, but even there someone had a really worrying incident recently: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31573854

I'm inclined to think that the buck always stops somewhere, and no place is really safe in this regard, but is there really no way to have some reasonable safeguards for these? The individual domains may be of little value to a registrar, but they're potentially enormously valuable to their owners, and the apparent asymmetry of incentives concerns me.

Are we just forced to generate noise on HN to resolve such cases or are there any reasonable alternatives out there that offer guarantees about only resorting to blocking/deleting domain in extreme cases, and provide the means to escalate without HN outcry?