Re:LiteLLM Python package compromised by supply-chain attack
by dec0dedab0de on Tuesday March 24, 2026 @01:11PM
(#47505934)
In the old world the dangerous insights required so many years of discipline that you could sort of trust that the person getting the insight would be ok. But then any idiot can get the insight by just eating some shrooms and oops, that's a problem.
I would think humans have been using psychedelics since before we figured out meditation. Likely even before we were humans.
Re:LiteLLM Python package compromised by supply-chain attack
by greazy on Wednesday March 25, 2026 @03:20AM
(#47514297)
Ah yes the stoned ape hypothesis. I don't know if there is or will ever be evidence to support the hypothesis.
I also like the drunk monkey hypothesis.
Re:LiteLLM Python package compromised by supply-chain attack
by KoftaBob on Tuesday March 24, 2026 @01:43PM
(#47506427)
What in the world are “the dangerous insights”?
Re:LiteLLM Python package compromised by supply-chain attack
by garthk on Tuesday March 24, 2026 @05:03PM
(#47509268)
“Society is a construct”, for starters?
Re:LiteLLM Python package compromised by supply-chain attack
by otabdeveloper4 on Wednesday March 25, 2026 @09:52AM
(#47517361)
That's babby's first insight. Most people figure this out on their own in kindergarten.
Re:LiteLLM Python package compromised by supply-chain attack
by AlexCoventry on Tuesday March 24, 2026 @02:01PM
(#47506687)
Supply-chain attacks long pre-date effective AI agentic coding, FWIW.
Software people could (mostly) trust each other's OSS contributions because we could trust the discipline it took in the first place. Not any more.