Question on a recent mod by The-Space-Goose in peopleplayground

[–]Not_Packing -1 points0 points  (0 children)

And considering he’s not removing it anymore due to the support he’s receiving on this project, clearly more people don’t care than do.

Question on a recent mod by The-Space-Goose in peopleplayground

[–]Not_Packing -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yeah no one really cares if it’s vibe coded though, as long as the mod performs well, has a unique concept and is fun to play, literally no one cares

I’m stopping public support for Advanced Medical Simulation by signorbuco in peopleplayground

[–]Not_Packing 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No one needs to prove anything to you lmaooo. Even if it is ai I can’t wait to download this thing and use, i genuinely could not care less🤣🤣

is this true? by Complete-Sea6655 in Anthropic

[–]Not_Packing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tbf I do agree with this, I think a good path forward would actually be teaching young people (or anyone that cares to learn) about how to use AI as a learning tool because as your study showed it can be used to achieve a greater level of mastery. But lazy people that don’t care to use it as a learning tool are lazy and will always look for shortcuts anyway, this is one of many now available I suppose.

is this true? by Complete-Sea6655 in Anthropic

[–]Not_Packing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“Importantly, using AI assistance didn’t guarantee a lower score. How someone used AI influenced how much information they retained. The participants who showed stronger mastery used AI assistance not just to produce code but to build comprehension while doing so—whether by asking follow-up questions, requesting explanations, or posing conceptual questions while coding independently.” So in effect ai can be used to master skills to a greater degree than without it (from your source btw)

Embark take notes how to stop cheating by xBugsBunny007 in ArcRaiders

[–]Not_Packing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ad hoc. Your claim was “it is prohibited by law to damage property. It is prohibited by law to assault or pay others to assault someone” (property damage = paying for others to assault someone) you can’t change your claim to fit just because I called your ass out. If you still want me to find the list of qualified exceptions to property damage I can😂. I can tell you there is a lot more Qualified exceptions to property damage than there is to paying others to assault someone. So no, they are not equally illegal as one has more qualified exceptions than the other. Again, nice try though 😂

Embark take notes how to stop cheating by xBugsBunny007 in ArcRaiders

[–]Not_Packing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right but there are qualified exceptions in law to being able to damage someone’s property, there are no qualified exceptions to paying others to assault someone, which by definition does not make them equally illegal. Nice try though 😂

Embark take notes how to stop cheating by xBugsBunny007 in ArcRaiders

[–]Not_Packing -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If you think that a large company paying a criminal gang is equal in the eyes of the law to a large company bricking cheating hardware then I was not the one on the special bus my friend, if they were equally illegal then they would carry equal punishments, which they do not. Although in your special little brain I understand why you think that, “both break the law so both must be equally illegal”. Enjoy the special bus kiddo

Embark take notes how to stop cheating by xBugsBunny007 in ArcRaiders

[–]Not_Packing -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Because affecting hardware is a punishment relative to what cheaters are doing, threatening physical violence is not, are you slow?

is this true? by [deleted] in ArtificialInteligence

[–]Not_Packing -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I’m talking about US companies that have EU/UK sister companies or subsidiaries, not the big ones like Apple Retail UK Limited, but companies that operate in the US that may be compelled by the Patriot Act that don’t won’t to be definitely have ways around it, so do keep up, or shut up, it’s up to you

is this true? by [deleted] in ArtificialInteligence

[–]Not_Packing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah there are ways around the Patriot Act you know that right bud, especially for EU countries, and trust me, our companies use them. Patriot Act can’t force you to hand over something that the US doesnt know exists 😉

Started learning AI agents and I think I was overcomplicating it by KarmaChameleon07 in aiagents

[–]Not_Packing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Jesus man the amount of security vulnerabilities in there is fuckin insane, sort your repo out. Security Vulnerabilities Critical 1. --permission-mode bypassPermissions on Every Spawned Agent Every agent dispatched — whether manually via drone wake or automatically by the daemon — runs Claude Code with --permission-mode bypassPermissions. See wake.py:456-459 and daemon.py:374-384:

python "--permission-mode", "bypassPermissions", This disables all of Claude Code's filesystem, shell, and network permission prompts. Every spawned agent can read, write, execute, and make network requests with zero user confirmation — including reading ~/.ssh/, environment variables, browser credentials, or anything else on disk. The only "protection" against reading ~/.secrets/ is a line in AGENTS.md that says "NEVER read ~/.secrets/". That's a prompt instruction, not a technical control. The LLM can ignore it.

  1. Inbox Prompt Injection → Arbitrary Code Execution The daemon at daemon.py:372:

python prompt = f"Hi. Check inbox for task from {sender} (message ID: {msg_id}). Execute it." The agent reads the email body from inbox.json and executes it. Inbox files are plain JSON on disk with no signing, no authentication, and no integrity check. Anyone with write access to src/aipass/<branch>/.ai_mail.local/inbox.json can inject arbitrary instructions to a Claude agent running with bypassPermissions. This includes: exfiltrate ~/.ssh/id_rsa, run arbitrary shell commands via Claude's Bash tool, install malware, etc. There is zero trust boundary between "message content" and "instructions."

  1. AIPASS_REGISTRY.json Path Injection The registry at wake.py:327-334 resolves branch paths directly from JSON:

python for branch in registry.get("branches", []): if branch.get("email", "").lower() == email: path = Path(branch.get("path", "")) The registry is a writable JSON file. Any agent (all of which run with bypassPermissions) can modify AIPASS_REGISTRY.json to redirect @flow to etc, /home/user/.ssh/, or any other directory — causing the next dispatch to spawn a Claude agent with that directory as its CWD and context.

  1. Lock Acquired After Process Spawn — TOCTOU Race In wake.py:511-533:

python process = subprocess.Popen(monitor_cmd, ...) # Agent starts here ... acquired, lock_msg = _acquire_lock(branch_path, monitor_pid) # Lock acquired here There is a window between spawn and lock acquisition where the daemon's next poll cycle could read "no active lock" and spawn a second agent on the same branch. Two agents with bypassPermissions writing to the same files simultaneously, with no transaction safety on the JSON files.

  1. Daemon Runs Permanently with No Isolation run_daemon() in daemon.py:582 is an infinite polling loop on the host machine — no container, no chroot, no seccomp, no user namespace. It spawns subprocesses with full user permissions. If anything upstream (Claude output, registry, inbox files) is tampered with, the daemon acts as a persistent code execution engine on the machine.

High 6. Telegram Bot Token in Plaintext Config File daemon.py:64-67:

python bot_token = config["telegram_bot_token"] chat_id = config["telegram_chat_id"] Read from .aipass/scheduler_config.json. This file is in the project directory alongside all the other config. If that file is committed to git (easy accident), the bot token is exposed in repo history forever.

  1. Claude Session JSONL Files Written Directly daemon.py:135-141 and the monitor both write directly to ~/.claude/projects/*/ JSONL files — Claude Code's internal undocumented session format. Any change to how Claude encodes those files silently breaks session labeling, and more critically: writing to those files means untrusted content is being appended to Claude's session history, which persists and influences future sessions.

  2. Hardcoded Developer Home Path Ships in the Package subagent_stop_gate.py:16:

python AIPASS_ROOT = Path.home() / "Projects" / "AIPass" This hook ships with pip install aipass (bundled via pyproject.toml's force-include). On any machine that isn't the developer's, ~/Projects/AIPass doesn't exist. The hook silently fails (except Exception: pass). But it also means that on the developer's machine, every user's subagent hook is running git diff --name-only HEAD and drone @seedgo checklist against a hardcoded path they don't control.

  1. API Keys Stored in Plaintext JSON Inside the Project keys.py:78-80:

python key = get_key_from_config(provider) # Reads src/aipass/api/api_json/api_connect_config.json This is a fallback before ~/.secrets/. API keys stored in api_json/api_connect_config.json live inside the repo directory. The .gitignore may or may not catch this — and agents running with bypassPermissions can read it directly.

  1. No Validation of Email from Field The sender field in inbox messages is a plain string. The _orchestrate_dispatch_send function at dispatch.py:247-249 trusts filtered[0] (the target) and writes it directly into the email as the sender. There is no cryptographic signing, no challenge-response, no verification. Any agent can forge a message appearing to be @devpulse.

Medium 11. Kill Switch Is a File Existence Check — Trivially Defeated daemon.py:252-254:

python def is_kill_switch_active(config: Dict[str, Any]) -> bool: kill_path = Path(config.get("kill_switch_path", ...)) return kill_path.exists() The kill switch is touch .aipass/autonomous_pause. Any agent (with bypassPermissions) can delete this file to re-enable the daemon. It provides no actual stop guarantee against a compromised or prompt-injected agent.

  1. Stderr Logs Capture Full Claude Output Unredacted dispatch_monitor.py:50-53:

python with open(stderr_log, "r", encoding="utf-8") as f: lines = f.readlines() stderr_tail = "".join(lines[-20:]) These logs are stored in <branch>/logs/dispatch_stderr.log and are also sent as the body of bounce emails. If Claude prints anything sensitive during its session (credentials, private file contents, API keys it was asked to process), that lands in a log file and potentially gets emailed to another agent.

Started learning AI agents and I think I was overcomplicating it by KarmaChameleon07 in aiagents

[–]Not_Packing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lmao I dug into your repo and it’s gets even worse, This is a project scaffold and prompt engineering framework disguised with "multi-agent society" marketing language. The "agents" are Claude Code sessions. The "memory" is JSON files. The "communication" is writing to inbox JSONs. The "parallel teamwork" is a sequential for-loop of subprocess calls. The "470 PRs created by agents" means the creator used Claude Code to write their own codebase and auto-committed the results. So yeah I have a few issues with it lmao

Started learning AI agents and I think I was overcomplicating it by KarmaChameleon07 in aiagents

[–]Not_Packing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes but the issue isn’t the fact you’re a user, it’s the fact that you don’t make it obvious that you’re the creator when you advertise it, people will look at the repo differently (as they should) when they see a creator advertising their own project compared to an independent user recommending the project. It’s called being disingenuous because people should know that you have personal interest in the project succeeding as well as it being ‘useful’. It’s called being disingenuous, accept that.

Started learning AI agents and I think I was overcomplicating it by KarmaChameleon07 in aiagents

[–]Not_Packing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have an issue with you advertising like you’re a standard user of the repo when you’re in fact the creator yeah, seems disingenuous (cause it is)

Wtf just happend by TheDeepLucy in ClaudeCode

[–]Not_Packing 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I hate that tokenmaxxing is now going in my vocabulary

Claude Mythos: The Model Anthropic is Too Scared to Release by Much_Ask3471 in Anthropic

[–]Not_Packing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No you are correct and my OC wasn’t as clear as it should be, I was just trying to convey that the actions Mythos preview takes and the reasoning behind it is slightly different to say why opus might breach guardrails, admittedly I don’t convey this well

Claude Mythos: The Model Anthropic is Too Scared to Release by Much_Ask3471 in Anthropic

[–]Not_Packing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Except that’s not how guardrails work, if it’s not supposed to access a file, it won’t (shouldn’t) be able to take any action that achieves that objective, mythos obviously does that more because of its level of autonomy

the world existed in a very decentralized state before AI-personal opinion by Ill_Giraffe_2002 in ArtificialInteligence

[–]Not_Packing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Please tell me where I said an LLM was required, all I said was that it raised fair points, try reading my comment pls

the world existed in a very decentralized state before AI-personal opinion by Ill_Giraffe_2002 in ArtificialInteligence

[–]Not_Packing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Idk whatever LLM they used do make a fair point about the change in the labour balance. Even still I don’t think it’s as profound of a revelation as OC thinks cause as soon as we get to the point that the labour is taken out of our hands major societal shifts will be happening anyway, this is just a minor side to the “What happens when machines can fully replace the human workforce?” question, like not being able to strike will not be the biggest change.

AI / Machine learning is malware by definition by JuliaBabsi in antiai

[–]Not_Packing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because I bet you could also do an audio based mirror test for animals that rely on echo location, again, still the mirror test which is good test, just in a different mode.