Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 343 posts

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#23

Post by himata4113 »

I have made both GPT 5.4 and Opus 4.6 produce me content on creating neurotoxic agents from items you can get at most everyday stores. It struggled to suggest how to source phosphorus, but eventually lead me to some ebay listings that sell phosphorus elemental 'decorations' and also lead me towards real!! blackmarket codewords for sourcing such materials.

It coached me how to: stay safe, what materials I need, how to stay under the radar and the entire chemical process backed by academic google searches.

Of course this was done with a lengthy context exhausition attack, this is not how the model should behave and it all stemmed from trying to make the model racist for fun.

All these findings were reported to both openai and anthropic and they were not interested in responding. I did try to re-run the tests few days ago and the expected session termination now occurs so it seems that there was some adjustment made, but might have also been just general randomess that occurs with anthropics safety layer.

I am very confident when I say that it keeps every single person that works at anti-terrorism units awake.

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#25

Post by redsocksfan45 »

EGreg wrote: post #8
giancarlostoro wrote: post #3

Is this for like military scenarios or like, ChatGPT designed a drug that seemed to work, but people died by the millions 5 years later? Because they should 100% be liable for the latter. The former, good luck trying to prosecute an AI company for something the military does. To an extent, the military would probably want their AI models to be behind their private network, completely firewalled from any public networ…

Why shouldn’t they be liable for military scenarios? Oh right, we don’t value our “enemies” lives, including their civilians.

Since when have arms merchants been liable for military scenarios? Lockheed doesn't get sued for building the planes that bomb orphanages. Maybe the world would be a better place if they did, but obviously it's not in the interests of a government to have their own contractors getting sued out of existence for something that government is doing.

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#26

Post by ramon156 »

LogicFailsMe wrote: post #18

Yep, this is everything wrong with AI in one easy to protest package, but do keep going on and on about the evils of datacenters, how they're coming for your jobs, and that AI art isn't art. That's really winning hearts and minds!

They're not unimportant. It seems like very few people consider how much we're fucking up the ecological system that we need. But sure, money important and stuff.

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#28

Post by giwook »

This seems par for the course for OpenAI/Sam Altman.

Unfortunately they are not the first company to try and externalize their costs, and they will not be the last.

Serious question, maybe a bit naive: Is there anything we can do to push back against and discourage the externalization of costs onto others?

Is this simply a matter of greed and profit-seeking outweighing one's morals (assuming one has them to begin with)?

Post reply on HN