Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

ASM -> C ≠ C -> LLMs

34,368 views • 15 days ago •via X (Twitter)

17 Comments

LaurieWired's profile picture
LaurieWired15 days ago

same reason why the highest reliable language decompilers (ghidra, ida, etc) can reconstruct from arbitrary binaries is…pseudo-c. predictable enough that you can reverse it

Ryan Fleury's profile picture
Ryan Fleury15 days ago

That is fascinating!

LaurieWired's profile picture
LaurieWired15 days ago

honestly I recommend any dev to try reverse engineering their own (small) binaries at least once! try writing a really simple program in C, and then do it again in rust. drop it in ghidra, use a model / mcp / whatever to churn away at it, and watch how different (or not!) the decompilation is from the original source code. you'll be surprised how it looks...especially rust (lol)

MemoryLeak's profile picture
MemoryLeak15 days ago

Content like this is why I open this piece of shit twitter thing.

_D's profile picture
_D15 days ago

A major point of C was to create a layer of abstraction to enable portability across many architectures. If we lived in a monoarchitecture world where all hardware was identical, I'd imagine there would still be a hold out assembly programmers who hold quality above all else.

Jawaid Bazyar's profile picture
Jawaid Bazyar15 days ago

The contract for C code to ASM is "the ASM will produce the same outputs for the same inputs". You can specify contracts of that type for LLM code.

Ryan Fleury's profile picture
Ryan Fleury15 days ago

That is not the contract for C code to ASM. But in any case, if the contracts are not computable, then they cannot be trusted by themselves.

Mangy Bear (หมีขี้เรื้อน)'s profile picture
Mangy Bear (หมีขี้เรื้อน)15 days ago

I can’t believe we have to have this totally retarded discussion but here we are 🤦

binit's profile picture
binit15 days ago

yeah the thing is LLMs are non deterministic while C compilers are supposed to be deterministic. I can exactly predict what it will output from a compiler but not the same from a LLM

Annu Singh's profile picture
Annu Singh15 days ago

It takes intelligence to design and craft a flute. Once created, the instrument reliably produces a musical tone when played correctly. A compiler is like a flute (tool), and a program is like music.

manohhoerse's profile picture
manohhoerse15 days ago

Very interesting video, probably. I'm sure the content is very deep. I just couldn't hear a word over how good that beard looks.

Damian Gray's profile picture
Damian Gray15 days ago

Like all analogies, it breaks down the closer you get to the source.

Sadly life respecter's profile picture
Sadly life respecter15 days ago

I mean if you ask an LLM , “solve XYZ” and it just solves XYZ, 99% of the tlime, even it can be super predictable. You just don’t like the fact that it solves XYZ, you would rather be doing that problem solving. Unfortunately the time of human problem solving is over

Ryan Fleury's profile picture
Ryan Fleury15 days ago

Embarrassing response & instantly trivially disproven

verse 's profile picture
verse 15 days ago

off topic but what camera are you using? looks reallly clean and detailed

The Coredump Whisperer's profile picture
The Coredump Whisperer15 days ago

PDP-11 heritage that we take for granted today through Intel and other ISAs...is C maps best to ISAs that used a heavily stack based abstraction with native hw stack frames call graphs. Recursion, nested calls, local variables, and function pointers etc. came easier.

Gerson Sosa's profile picture
Gerson Sosa15 days ago

You cut off right at the point it was getting interesting, the real question for me is: how can you make these tools as realiable as a compiler, these are supposedly stochastic

Related Videos

>[ T A C T I C A L - F R ]
0:59

Sensitive content

>[ T A C T I C A L - F R ]

𝙊𝙥𝙧𝙚𝙠

37,185 views • 1 year ago