Thread

ZuckOff is a free app that sees Meta glasses before they see you

400 points · 351 comments · choult

user_7832 · 1789989751 · focus · HN ↗
I... don't know how I feel about this. I mean, the concept, sure, good idea. Is it reliable? Perhaps. But... I get a "buy merch" popup the moment I open the page, and there seems to be a pro option for what seems to be a very much LLM-aided app? ...IDK, rubs off a bit wrong IMO. Just my personal opinion.
1. aogaili · 1789995197 · focus · HN ↗
  so what if it is "very much LLM-aided app"?
  We are going to have the organic label soon on apps with this mindset..AI assisted development is evolving by the day and at the rate most apps will be built that way..
  1. n4r9 · 1789995997 · focus · HN ↗
    I'd love a label like that which tells me when an app has had thought put into it
    aogaili · 1789996095 · focus · HN ↗
    You can put a lot of thoughts while using LLMs.
    You are equating manual coding with more thinking, which has proven to be not the case given that it is mostly automated.
    justacrow · 1789997220 · focus · HN ↗
    If the developer can't be bothered to not make it look vibecoded I assume there's a minimal amount of thought and effort put into it. And in that case I'm not going to bother using it.
    aogaili · 1789997804 · focus · HN ↗
    Maybe this developer didn't bother I didn't even look frankly.
    My point was that you can have very well designed and thoughted apps with LLMs. In fact, I'd argue you can go way further and deeper than any manual coded application paired with AI assistance.
    But maybe this instance is not the case. But even if it turns out to be not the case, if the app does work and serves the utility you are after, then why not using it? People use many things in everyday life without thinking about what thought was put into it..in fact, most people don't think at all about what it took to build anything, and how it was built..
    Do you really know or care if the shoes you wearing was handmade or built by a factory in china using robots? you probably don't know and don't care.
    ImPostingOnHN · 1790001260 · focus · HN ↗
    > if the app does work and serves the utility you are after, then why not using it?
    Take a step back and think about your question in the context of privacy and software security.
    For a few example answers, look at:
    - <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adware" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adware
    - <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spyware" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spyware
    - <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trojan_horse_(computing)" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trojan_horse_(computing)
    aogaili · 1790001817 · focus · HN ↗
    But what does this has to do with LLM-assisted coding? I wouldn't trust this app even it was manually coded.
    In fact, given the recent reports, in terms of security, one is better off consulting LLMs on the exposure surfaces. Something a solo developer can now do cheaply but in the past required a lot of specialized knowledge.
    Sorry I don't understand your argument.
    ImPostingOnHN · 1790002266 · focus · HN ↗
    > But what does this has to do with LLM-assisted coding?
    What does "LLM-assisted coding" have to do with the question I answered? Here's that question again:
    > if the app does work and serves the utility you are after, then why not using it?
    Note that this question does not contain any reference to "LLMs". Indeed, an LLM-generated product can contain adware, spyware, or trojan horses just like a human-written one.
    For additional context, this app in question seems to actually contain adware and spyware, and has a closed source codebase, so might contain a trojan horse as well.
    Those seem like pretty good reasons to not run this totally-vibe-coded software, so I'm sorry, but I don't understand your argument that LLMs make this okay or not okay or whatever.
    aogaili · 1790003437 · focus · HN ↗
    I get it - I think there mis-communication here.
    My comment was about not equating every LLM assisted app as poorly thought of. Your comment is about this specific app, and I personally would not install this app regardless of how it was coded.
    But again in terms of security since you brought it, I'd argue that having LLM assisted coded app might be secure than manually coded application given the recent advancements. Again, this is a generic statement, not specific to this app.
    ImPostingOnHN · 1790004125 · focus · HN ↗
    The original discussion was not about every LLM assisted app, it was specifically about vibe-coded apps, particularly ones with so little human input that experienced coders can tell they were vibe-coded.
    Your later comments generalizing to "every LLM assisted app" seem like a bit of insecurity you might be feeling for using LLM assistance. No need to feel that way. LLM assistance is okay. We're discussing something different from mere LLM assistance.
    aogaili · 1790016211 · focus · HN ↗
    That is the original comment: " for what seems to be a very much LLM-aided app? "
    The author mentioned LLM-aided app, not even AI assisted; nor vibe coded hence my reaction. I don't have insecurity from using LLM nor from coding manually. But I noticed a trend in people thinking and biases and it threw me off hence the comment.
    My original comment was heavily downvoted and furthermore some of my comments were accused of being written by AI meanwhile I'm writing it by hand. Again, people are taking tribes/camps, if you speaking of insecurities, it actually the opposite clearly, many programmers are worried of being displaced and automated. And I do understand the concern, I'm just stating the fact that one can have very deeply thoughted LLM-aided app.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.