[HN Gopher] Chrome DevTools now uses Gemini to help with JavaScr...
___________________________________________________________________
Chrome DevTools now uses Gemini to help with JavaScript Errors in
the console
Author : ssahoo
Score : 50 points
Date : 2024-05-17 20:25 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (developer.chrome.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (developer.chrome.com)
| ssahoo wrote:
| What's funny is Prompt injection warning at the bottom.
|
| "Many of LLM applications are susceptible to a form of abuse
| known as prompt injection. This feature is no different. It is
| possible to trick the LLM into accepting instructions that are
| not intended by the developers."
| buildbot wrote:
| Yeah I don't love the idea of an error being able to prompt
| inject i to a javascript console, even if it is very
| sandboxed...
| matt123456789 wrote:
| Don't forget - the Chrome DevTools console can be styled and
| even renders ANSI escapes, so the text read by the LLM might
| be completely different than what you see on-screen.
|
| https://developer.chrome.com/docs/devtools/console/format-
| st...
| mebazaa wrote:
| Is this a first for Chrome DevTools to have features that require
| a Google account?
| Andrex wrote:
| That's a good point.
|
| Syncing DevTools settings likely requires it, but otherwise,
| not sure and not a great direction to go in IMO.
| paulirish wrote:
| I think it's the second.
|
| Settings Sync launched ~a year ago and requires being signed
| into a Google account, plus consent.
| https://developer.chrome.com/docs/devtools/customize#sync
| hwbunny wrote:
| Will it untangle heavily obfuscated code?
| akira2501 wrote:
| I recently found the cursor in dark mode to be impossible to see,
| the autocompletion to be maddening, and the constant change of
| tab key behavior all to be so frustrating that I ended up
| instrumenting my own overlay debugging system into a recent
| single page app using xterm.js.
|
| I'm just really tired of all these hyper opinionated bad
| corporate tools.
|
| So now after three separate click through agreements you can have
| Gemini tell you what any google search of the error message
| itself could have. Notably, because Gemini knows nothing about
| your server, it can't tell you how to _actually_ fix the problem,
| just describe it in _slightly_ more detail.
|
| Perhaps they chose the worst possible example, but to jump
| through all those hoops to end at that very underwhelming
| response which fails to truly explain the consequences of no-cors
| does have me giggling.
| beeboobaa3 wrote:
| So does this also consider the JavaScript the browser loaded or
| is this just a dumb LLM "explain this error message: " prompt? If
| the latter... Who needs this?
| hoten wrote:
| It does use some page context, including related code:
|
| "related source code"
| https://developer.chrome.com/docs/devtools/console/understan...
| beeboobaa3 wrote:
| I can't wait for end users to submit bug reports containing
| Geminis interpretation instead of the actual error message.
| halfjoking wrote:
| Oh Jesus... my boss has been known to open Devtools and give us
| suggestions about what's wrong with the layout/styles without
| understanding CSS.
|
| Now he has an AI to help hallucinate how he'd easily solve any
| problem.
| baw-bag wrote:
| Tell him on a team call that you can also google the first
| result and that he is more than free to pull the project and
| implement the solution to this difficult bug and take
| responsibility for it. For me that stopped the "Boss"
| bullshit. Had AI been involved, I can only imagine how
| painful that would be.
| Osmose wrote:
| Maybe it's just me but if I felt like my application's error
| messages weren't easy enough to understand I'd try to improve the
| messages instead of throwing all the context at an AI and hoping
| for the best.
| jraph wrote:
| Yep. The Web console could just link to some documentation.
|
| The link could even be parameterized so the URLs or other
| elements related to the error replace placeholders in the doc.
| But I'm sure a developer is capable of enough abstraction to
| replace example data themselves.
| rishab_kokate wrote:
| Agreed! it would be really helpful if the console just showed
| me some documentation but if google manages to make something
| similar to github copilot then it could potentially be a game
| changer.
| ajross wrote:
| People have been trying to get compilers and runtimes to
| generate better errors for decades, and sites like
| StackOverflow exist to backfill the fact that this is a really
| hard problem. If an AI can get you a better explanation
| synchronously, doesn't that in fact represent an improvement in
| the "messages"?
| olliej wrote:
| No because all the AI is doing is making up statistically
| plausible sounding nonsense? The best case output is a
| correct summary of the documentation page - why add a huge
| amount of power use alongside massive privacy invasion just
| to deal with that?
|
| I have read and re-read this article and I don't understand
| how this is better for any purpose other than "we put AI in
| something, increase our stock price!"
| ajross wrote:
| That sounds like a generic argument against any AI
| integration, though. "All they do is make up statistically
| plausible sounding nonsense" is definitionally true, but
| sorta specious as it turns out that nonsense is often
| pretty useful. In particular in this case because it gives
| you a "summary of the documentation page" you'd otherwise
| have to go look up, something we know empirically is
| difficult for a lot of otherwise productive folks.
| MrDarcy wrote:
| > No because all the AI is doing is making up statistically
| plausible sounding nonsense?
|
| Isn't that just what we humans do with our educated
| guesses?
| hu3 wrote:
| DevTools can't force frameworks and libraries to output better
| error messages.
|
| But it can help us humans understand them better.
| daft_pink wrote:
| Seems like a positive thing generally as it will likely to tell
| you the common issue behind your console error.
| sublinear wrote:
| Why does this exist?
|
| The example AI-generated explanation shown doesn't seem any more
| helpful than the original error. It just states the same
| information in a long-winded manner.
|
| Errors and warnings are already deterministic and unambiguous.
| Why introduce the opportunity to confuse people or just be plain
| wrong?
| dullcrisp wrote:
| Looks like it's basically like Googling the error message,
| which is usually the first thing I do with an error I don't
| understand. Seems like a reasonable integration from that
| perspective.
| ajross wrote:
| Why does StackOverflow exist? Why does /usr/bin/man exist? The
| idea that "deterministic and unambiguous" error messages
| emitted at the point of failure are all that you need to fix
| your code seems kinda laughable, frankly.
| darkvertex wrote:
| Edge did it first: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-
| edge/devtools-gu...
| wiseowise wrote:
| Another reason to ditch Chr*me.
| jraph wrote:
| > To use this feature, make sure that you:
|
| > Are located in one of the supported regions and are at least 18
| years old.
|
| Seriously. For to get an explanation of a freaking JS error
| message.
|
| Now for a debug session you need a Google account, to agree with
| a legal notice, a privacy notice and be at least 18 years old and
| boil I don't know how many liters of water for generating a text
| that could be static in some documentation center / KB.
|
| I love some self deprecation humor Google, too bad it is a little
| late for April Fools.
| bhhaskin wrote:
| I have always worried that Chrome was gulping as much data from
| users as possible and sending it back to Google. This reinforces
| that feeling.
| olliej wrote:
| So now Google wants to have access to content developers are
| working on before it's even public is what I'm hearing?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-05-17 23:00 UTC)