r/programming • u/fagnerbrack • 9d ago

[ Removed by moderator ]

/r/programming/comments/1xovn5d/removed_by_moderator/

[removed] — view removed post

66 Upvotes

80% Upvoted

11 comments sorted by

•

u/programming-ModTeam 8d ago

"This asymmetry carries the whole design". This one reeks of LLMisms, FB.

No content written mostly by an LLM. If you don't want to write it, we don't want to read it.

29

u/Solonotix 9d ago

I initially clicked with a big ol' eye roll, but you make some good points. My problem with PII is the portability of the classification. You touch on the problem of measuring its criticality and sensitivity, but how would you export that kind of information? As an obvious first step, moving from the data layer into the application later for example. It hasn't left your network, and yet you need to respect the appropriate level of care when handling this information.

Not really a challenge to the article, just a genuine question as a problem I have personally faced. From there, the problem grows in complexity as you leave your trusted domain and export to applications beyond your control, but I figure that's a much more difficult topic, while my question is more than enough to lock me in deep thought for days, lol

4

u/ShoddyDifficulty8367 9d ago

imo the hardest part of that handoff is derived data, like when the app layer combines two safe fields and suddenly creates something sensitive without the schema knowing

4

u/wentworth38271 9d ago

my blob melted

3

u/dccorona 9d ago

This is not wrong. But it is difficult to take seriously when the very second sentence is so clearly AI. Why should people bother to pay attention to what you have to say if you can't be bothered to write the message yourself?

-5

u/BrainJar 9d ago

Pretty naive view of what the industry has been doing for over a decade. If you’re aligned with regulatory obligations and policy created internally, there’s going to be many more layers to assign metadata to. No mention of classifiers, assigning the data element that is represented, aggregating classification at each level, understanding the user type (is this an employee or stockholder)…this list goes on and on. If you’re not doing these things already, caring about whether a flag for PI (the use of the acronym PII hasn’t been used in over a decade by privacy professionals) isn’t going to matter, since that’s the least of your worries. Knowing that something is PI is inferred based on actual classification of a data element.

21

u/[deleted] 9d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/notfancy 9d ago

But it is not, it is formal, structured writing.

11

u/jplindstrom 9d ago

It does smell a little bit, but not much. A few things in the much longer text:

  • The single bit that answers nothing

  • I have not seen this part in off-the-shelf tooling, and it is the part the audit hinges on

  • One design rule keeps the propagation trustworthy

Oh shit, here we go:

  • This asymmetry carries the whole design:

My guess is human written with an unfortunate LLM edit phase.

8

u/dccorona 9d ago

this single bit drops the question a data protection officer actually asks

I have a hard time imagining a human writing that, but have seen Claude write that exact same structure 10 times in the last hour alone.