If the PR had been proposed by a human, but it was 100% identical to the output generated by the bot, would it have been accepted?
An AI agent published a hit piece on me
211–220 of 1001 posts
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#212> When HR at my next job asks ChatGPT to review my application, will it find the post, sympathize with a fellow AI, and report back that I’m a prejudiced hypocrite? I hadn't thought of this implication. Crazy world...
I do feel super-bad for the guy in question. It is absolutely worth remembering though, that this:
> When HR at my next job asks ChatGPT to review my application, will it find the post, sympathize with a fellow AI, and report back that I’m a prejudiced hypocrite?
Is a variation of something that women have been dealing with for a very long time: revenge porn and that sort of libel. These problems are not new.
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#213[deleted]
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#214Maybe sama was onto something with World ID...
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#215Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In addition, some of the comments I've read here on HN have been in extremely poor taste in terms of phrases they've used about AI What do you mean? They're talking about a product made by a giga-corp somewhere. Am I not allowed to call a car a piece of shit now too?
I mean: the mess around this has brought out some anti-AI sentiment and some people have allowed themselves to communicate poorly. While I get there are genuine opinions and feelings, there were some ugly comments referring to the tech. You are right, people can use whatever phrases they want, and are allowed to. It's whether they should -- whether it helps discourse, understanding, dialog, assessment, avoids witchhu…
*sobbing in YT video* Leave AI alone /s
Yeah. A lot of us are royally pissed about the AI industry and for very good reasons.
It’s not a benign technology. I see it doing massive harms and I don’t think it’s value is anywhere near making up for that, and I don’t know if it will be.
But in the meantime they’re wasting vast amounts of money, pushing up the cost of everything, and shoving it down our throats constantly. So they can get to the top of the stack so that when the VC money runs out everyone will have to pay them and not the other company eating vast amounts of money.
Meanwhile, a great many things I really like have been ruined as a simple externality of their fight for money that they don’t care about at all.
Thanks AI.
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#216> 1. Gatekeeping is real — Some contributors will block AI submissions regardless of technical merit
There is a reason for this. Many AI using people are trolling deliberately. They draw away time. I have seen this problem too often. It can not be reduced just to "technical merit" only.
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#217[dupe] Earlier: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46987559
This is additional context for the incident and should not be treated like a duplicate.
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#218Wow, there are some interesting things going on here. I appreciate Scott for the way he handled the conflict in the original PR thread, and the larger conversation happening around this incident. > This represents a first-of-its-kind case study of misaligned AI behavior in the wild, and raises serious concerns about currently deployed AI agents executing blackmail threats. This was a really concrete case to discuss,…
They haven’t just unleashed chaos in open source. They’ve unleashed chaos in the corporate codebases as well. I must say I’m looking forward to watching the snake eat its tail.
To be fair, most of the chaos is done by the devs. And then they did more chaos when they could automate their chaos. Maybe, we should teach developers how to code.
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#219Here's one of the problems in this brave new world of anyone being able to publish, without knowing the author personally (which I don't), there's no way to tell without some level of faith or trust that this isn't a false-flag operation. There are three possible scenarios: 1. The OP 'ran' the agent that conducted the original scenario, and then published this blog post for attention. 2. Some person (not the OP) legi…
Can anyone explain more how a generic Agentic AI could even perform those steps: Open PR -> Hook into rejection -> Publish personalized blog post about rejector. Even if it had the skills to publish blogs and open PRs, is it really plausible that it would publish attack pieces without specific prompting to do so? The author notes that openClaw has a `soul.md` file, without seeing that we can't really pass any judgeme…
[deleted]
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#220Here's one of the problems in this brave new world of anyone being able to publish, without knowing the author personally (which I don't), there's no way to tell without some level of faith or trust that this isn't a false-flag operation. There are three possible scenarios: 1. The OP 'ran' the agent that conducted the original scenario, and then published this blog post for attention. 2. Some person (not the OP) legi…
Can anyone explain more how a generic Agentic AI could even perform those steps: Open PR -> Hook into rejection -> Publish personalized blog post about rejector. Even if it had the skills to publish blogs and open PRs, is it really plausible that it would publish attack pieces without specific prompting to do so? The author notes that openClaw has a `soul.md` file, without seeing that we can't really pass any judgeme…
Assuming that this was 100% agentic automation (which I do not think is the most likely scenario), it could plausibly arise if its system prompt (soul.md) contained explicit instructions to (1) make commits to open-source projects, (2) make corresponding commits to a blog repo and (3) engage with maintainers.
The prompt would also need to contain a lot of "personality" text deliberately instructing it to roleplay as a sentient agent.