full disclosure: I work at EDAMAME, and I think we've built something pretty cool -- runtime behavioral analysis to catch a wide spectrum of attacks and agent divergence attacks. Happy to answer questions too!
Given that this includes rat and mouse studies, it seems like this theory is more around the idea that criticality is a characteristic of how brains work in general, not that human brains hit criticality as a peculiarity of our particularly high intelligence
This is an especially good analogy because facing a well-resourced adversary in cybersecurity is like finding out that the enemy brought artillery -- hopefully you weren't relying entirely on obscurity because pretty soon there will be nowhere to hide
lol what? that wasn't a hype comment for Ramp, I'm kinda put off by Ramp's attitude. It gives me the ick like all the founders saying "I work 100 hour weeks" -- who cares, let's talk about your product.
FWIW I agree with your criteria for AI agent success, and I haven't seen it happen yet.
Funny connection here between the proliferation of easy-to-install but not-quite-dependable dependencies and the recent spate of supply chain attacks.
And, at the same time, we have these AI tools that make it super easy to roll your own version of something. Feels like there's a big push from both sides to start reducing external dependencies.
Ramp does seem to have a genuinely good product, but every time I interact with anyone who works on it, I'm struck by how much they want to talk about how hardcore and advanced their working style is. This was true before AI, and it's very true now
Seems to me like there's also a divide between observational laws (e.g. Hyrum's Law just says "this seems to be true") and prescriptive laws (e.g. Knuth's Law, which is really a statement about how you ought to behave)