Hacker News Reader

a lot of open source software had a false sense of being secure with the assumption that someone else would have audited the code

Do you have examples of people saying this? I don't think I've come across idea being espoused...

View on HN

I've certainly seen people interpret Linus's law to mean this. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus's_law).

I do not have an example for this, but the most ridiculous argument for open source software (at lease for most people) has always been that if the software has a bug you could simply fix it yourself. Funny enough this has actually become kind of true with new LLMs.

Did you not fix bugs in the oss you run, pre-LLM? Or not bugs, just your own changes? Being able to just grab the source and tweak it without needing to try to RE or wait around or convince the owners/developers to do something I wanted to happen was one of the biggest selling points.

Most people did not do this, no. Or even if you did, upstreaming the patch was even more uncommon.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com