So I was reading this article about Signal-creator Moxie Marlinspike’s new project, Confer , which claims to be a verifiably E2E encrypted LLM chat service. There are a couple of short blog articles that give the gist of it, and some github repos including this one that includes scripts for producing the VM that will run your particular LLM session. But if I’m following this all correctly, it implies that every chat session (or perhaps every logged-in user) would have their own VM running their own LLM to ensure that the chain of trust is complete. This seems impossible from a scalability perspective, as even small LLMs require huge quantities of RAM and compute. Did I miss something fundamental here?

  • glitching@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 hours ago

    off topic, but of all the fix-worthy things, that’s what needed his attention?

    • Lemmchen@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      21 hours ago

      What other cryptographic practical applications are more worthy of his attention right now?

      • glitching@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        20 hours ago

        you should let go of the imprinted idea that in order to criticise something you hafta offer a better, fully fleshed out alternative; you are allowed to say X is shitty on its own.

        coming from the guy who improved and converted the utterly cumbersome PGP stack to a usable thing with TextSecure/RedPhone (those got later merged into Signal), yeah, this shit is underwhelming, to say the least.

        I’m gonna go out on a limb and state that securing the pipe between you and the word-guessing program isn’t currently high on anyone’s list.

        • grey_maniac@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          12 hours ago

          offer a better, fully fleshed out alternative

          is a bit of straw man. Offering a rough list of alternatives for discussion would be sufficient response to the question.

          you are allowed to say X is shitty on its own

          while true, this ignores that your original statement was challenging this choice over other possibilities. So yes, you can just say it’s a shitty choice, but you (colloquially, at least) implied there exist better choices in your opinion. So it is reasonable to ask what those might be.

          • glitching@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 hours ago

            I ain’t gotta offer nothing, my take is that securing the pipe to the stochastic parrot is a shit waste of time and effort, especially when it’s coming from techno jesus.

            if he’s bored, there’s list of shit to implement in signal longer than m- err, it’s long. and what ain’t on it is more AI and/or crypto wallets. fuckin GRR Martin clone over here…