I used AI to reverse engineer real binaries, understand how they work, and then clone their functionality into brand-new applications. In this video I show the full process — what the AI can actually figure out, where it falls short, and how far you can push the technique of turning an existing binary into something new. This is the practical side of AI-assisted reverse engineering, not theory. What you’ll see: How AI helps tear apart and understand binaries Extracting logic, behavior, and structure Cloning that functionality into a clean new application Real examples of what works and what still needs a human engineer The limits, risks, and surprising capabilities of current tools If you’ve ever wondered how far AI can go in reverse-engineering and recreating software from binaries, this is the deep dive. For a free download of Task Manager TMOG, visit: https://tmog.org
ADVERTISEMENT
If it's OK for companies to train AI models on stolen / Pirated data, then its morally OK for people to use those same AI's to recreate software.
If buying isn't owning, cloning isn't stealing.
Companies want to replace people with Ai, but now people are replacing companies with Ai.
Corporations just have to get confortable with not owning their software.
Unfortunately, these big corps have poisoned the well so much, no one will care if they burn. Also, all these AI companies stole everything to build their AI.
You underestimate how much people hate software companies.
In Adobe's case, it's called KARMA.
when it was artists who were angry their work was being eaten up and spat out by ai with no respect for their ownership, this wasnt a problem to any of the tech bros or the big corporations. Now when its their software thats being caught up, its a problem.
"I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that."
"...when the application's owner is simply treated as in inconvenient detail." Isn't that basically what all AI training has done with all content created by humanity? Art, music, poetry, websites, novels, etc. If we're being consistent, and that type of absorption is allowed, then applications should be absorbed with the same amount of disrespect.
10 years ago, i said the same. since big tech now only wants to screw me over, harvest my data and trying me to rent everything, i do not care anymore. i produce software for 30 years. i know i will loose money over this, but again, i do not care anymore.
Interesting how quickly people change their minds when it actually affects them.
About how those big AI models were trained, and on what...
In the future, corporations will own nothing and be happy?
If the product is made worthless, they will have to finally invest in customer service to retain their users, instead of spitting in their face.
Asking to have sympathy to the same companies who stole all our information to train their models and have predatory subscription models? Bold strategy
The thing is, AI is already in the wild. Anyone can run an eight billion parameter agent on their own machine. Gabe Newell, absolute genius, wisely pointed out that "piracy" isn't a matter of people just wanting to steal stuff. People pirate when the pirates are providing a better service. People want to pay for the things they use by and large. They just don't want to be abused and exploited along the way. Looking at you, Adobe.
Honestly, I have zero problems with Adobe and Microsoft facing this. They have been relentlessly pushing AI crap onto their customers for years. It is only fair that these companies get to enjoy the "benefits" just as much as their customers do when losing their livelihood to AI.
Someone who worked for Microsoft is against cloning big tech software....shocker
I should have demoed the calculator more thoroughly! Suffice to say what's there works well, but there are parts missing. I could re-prompt to flesh those out, but I'm not *actually* pursuing a new calculator... So it's NOT a perfect clone, because it's incomplete, though that it did do all seems correct. Seeing a lot of great discussion in the comments! To clarify the distinction: there's a big legal and technical difference between genuine clean-room reverse engineering (spec-based, zero access to decompiled binaries) versus feeding decompiled disassembly straight into an LLM to clone proprietary software. Where do you draw the line between software preservation/interoperability and outright piracy? Let me know your thoughts below!