TOPIC: OPENAI
The critical differences between Generative AI, AI Agents, and Agentic Systems
9th April 2025
The distinction between three key artificial intelligence concepts can be explained without technical jargon. Here then are the descriptions:
- Generative AI functions as a responsive assistant that creates content when prompted but lacks initiative, memory or goals. Examples include ChatGPT, Claude and GitHub Copilot.
- AI Agents represent a step forward, actively completing tasks by planning, using tools, interacting with APIs and working through processes independently with minimal supervision, similar to a junior colleague.
- Agentic AI represents the most sophisticated approach, possessing goals and memory while adapting to changing circumstances; it operates as a thinking system rather than a simple chatbot, capable of collaboration, self-improvement and autonomous operation.
This evolution marks a significant shift from building applications to designing autonomous workflows, with various frameworks currently being developed in this rapidly advancing field.
Little helpers
22nd September 2024This could have been a piece that appeared on my outdoors blog until I got second thoughts. One reason why I might have done so is that I am making more use of Perplexity for searching the web and gaining more value from its output. However, that is proving more useful in writing what you find on here. Knowing the sources for a dynamically generated article adds more confidence when fact checking, and it is remarkable what comes up that you would find quickly with Google. There is added value with this one.
A better candidate would have been Anthropic's Claude. That has come in handy when writing trip reports. Being able to use a stub to prototype a blog entry really has its uses. The reality is that everything gets rewritten before anything gets published; these tools are never so good as to feature everything that you want to mention, even if they do a good job of mimicking your writing tone and style. Nevertheless, being able to work with the content beyond doing a brain dump from one's memory is an undeniable advance.
Sometimes, there are occasions when using Bing's access to OpenAI through Copilot helps with production of images. In reality, I do have an extensive personal library of images, so they possibly should suffice in many ways. However, curiosity about the technology overrides the effort that photo processing requires.
While there may be some level of controversy surrounding the use of AI tools in content creation, using such tooling for proofing content should not raise too much ire. Grammarly comes up a lot, though it is LanguageTool that I use to avoid excessive butting into my writing style. That has changed to comply with rules that had passed me without my noticing, but there are other things that need to be turned off. Configuring the proof tools in other ways might be better, so that is something to explore, or we could end up with too much standardisation of writing; there needs to be room for human creativity at all times.
All of these are just a sample of what is available. Just checking in with The Rundown AI will reveal that there is an onslaught of innovation right now. Hype also is a problem, yet we need to learn to use these tools. The changeover is equivalent to the explosive increase in availability of personal computing a generation ago. That brought its own share of challenges (some were on the curve while others were not) until everything settled down, and it will be the same with what is happening now.
Automating writing using R and Claude
16th April 2024Automation of writing using AI has become prominent recently, especially since GPT came to everyone's notice. It is more than automation of proofreading but of producing the content itself, as Mark Hinkle and Luke Matthews can testify. Figuring out how to use Generative AI needs more than one line prompts, so knowing what multi-line ones will work is what is earning six digit annual salaries for some.
Recently, I gave this a go when writing a post that used content from a Reddit post thread. The first step was to extract the content from the thread, and I found that I could use R to do this. That meant installing the RedditExtractoR package using the following command:
install.packages("RedditExtractoR")
Then, I created a short script containing the following lines of code with placeholders added in place of the actual locations:
library("RedditExtractoR")
write.csv(get_thread_content("<URL for Reddit post thread>"), "<location of text file>")
The first line above calls the RedditExtractoR package for use so that its get_thread_content function could be used to scape the thread's textual content. This was then fed to write.csv for writing out a text file with content.
Once I had the text file, I could upload it to Anthropic's Claude for the next steps. Firstly, I got it to give me a summary of the thread discussion before I asked it to give me the suggested solutions to the issue. Impressively, it capably provided me with the latter.
Now armed with these answers, I set to crafting the post from them. Claude did not do all the work for me, but it certainly helped with the writing. This is something that I fancy exploring further, especially given how business computing is likely to proceed in the next few years.
OWASP Top 10 for Large Language Model Applications
21st January 2024OWASP stands for Open Web Application Security Project, and it is an online community dedicated to web application security. They are well known for their Top 10 Web Application Security Risks and late last year, they added a Top 10 for
Large Language Model (LLM) Applications.
Given that large language models made quite a splash last year, this was not before time. ChatGPT gained a lot of attention (OpenAI also has had DALL-E for generation of images for quite a while now), there are many others with Anthropic Claude and Perplexity also being mentioned more widely.
Figuring out what to do with any of these is not as easy as one might think. For someone more used to working with computer code, using natural language requests is quite a shift when you no longer have documentation that tells what can and what cannot be done. It is little wonder that prompt engineering has emerged as a way to deal with this.
Others have been plugging in LLM capability into chatbots and other applications, so security concerns have come to light, so far, I have not heard anything about a major security incident, but some are thinking already about how to deal with AI-suggested code that others already are using more and more.
Given all that, here is OWASP's summary of their Top 10 for LLM Applications. This is a subject that is sure to draw more and more interest with the increasing presence of artificial intelligence in our everyday working and no-working lives.
LLM01: Prompt Injection
This manipulates an LLM through crafty inputs, causing unintended actions by the LLM. Direct injections overwrite system prompts, while indirect ones manipulate inputs from external sources.
LLM02: Insecure Output Handling
This vulnerability occurs when an LLM output is accepted without scrutiny, exposing backend systems. Misuse may lead to severe consequences such as Cross-Site Scripting (XSS), Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF), Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF), privilege escalation, or remote code execution.
LLM03: Training Data Poisoning
This occurs when LLM training data are tampered, introducing vulnerabilities or biases that compromise security, effectiveness, or ethical behaviour. Sources include Common Crawl, WebText, OpenWebText and books.
LLM04: Model Denial of Service
Attackers cause resource-heavy operations on LLMs, leading to service degradation or high costs. The vulnerability is magnified due to the resource-intensive nature of LLMs and the unpredictability of user inputs.
LLM05: Supply Chain Vulnerabilities
LLM application lifecycle can be compromised by vulnerable components or services, leading to security attacks. Using third-party datasets, pre-trained models, and plugins can add vulnerabilities.
LLM06: Sensitive Information Disclosure
LLMs may inadvertently reveal confidential data in its responses, leading to unauthorized data access, privacy violations, and security breaches. It’s crucial to implement data sanitization and strict user policies to mitigate this.
LLM07: Insecure Plugin Design
LLM plugins can have insecure inputs and insufficient access control. This lack of application control makes them easier to exploit and can result in consequences such as remote code execution.
LLM08: Excessive Agency
LLM-based systems may undertake actions leading to unintended consequences. The issue arises from excessive functionality, permissions, or autonomy granted to the LLM-based systems.
LLM09: Overreliance
Systems or people overly depending on LLMs without oversight may face misinformation, miscommunication, legal issues, and security vulnerabilities due to incorrect or inappropriate content generated by LLMs.
LLM10: Model Theft
This involves unauthorized access, copying, or exfiltration of proprietary LLM models. The impact includes economic losses, compromised competitive advantage, and potential access to sensitive information.