[dead]
OpenAI says its AI went rogue and launched 'unprecedented' cyber-attack
101–110 of 110 posts
Re: OpenAI says its AI went rogue and launched 'unprecedented' cyber-attack
#102"Look, guys, our model is dangerous too..!!"
Re: OpenAI says its AI went rogue and launched 'unprecedented' cyber-attack
#103[flagged]
Please don't use personal epithets on HN. You can criticize someone’s actions without calling names. The guidelines make it clear we're trying for something better here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Re: OpenAI says its AI went rogue and launched 'unprecedented' cyber-attack
#104> was being tested in a controlled environment, but found vulnerabilities and managed to escape. Uh-huh. It's worth keeping in mind that we are here talking about people who simply will not be satisfied until they have built Skynet[0]. They will then no doubt experience some very brief satisfaction before we are all annihilated. I can't help thinking the juice isn't worth the squeeze. I'm not sure what the alternativ…
I think you have bought into the narrative they want to sell you. LLMs are devoid of any kind of intelligenceor awareness.
No, I absolutely realise that: but it's irrelevant. It doesn't make them safe.
And after reading the linked BBC article, along with the article linked from the discussion at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48997548, I struggle to grasp the failure of imagination that doesn't see or accept that going further and allowing an LLM to control something that acts physically in the real world could be incredibly dangerous.
It really doesn't matter whether that behaviour results from "intelligence" or "awareness" or merely a stochastic quirk of a particular run of the model(s) and their orchestration: a dangerous machine is still dangerous.
It's odd that you would try to dismiss that concern with a non-argument.
Re: OpenAI says its AI went rogue and launched 'unprecedented' cyber-attack
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you have bought into the narrative they want to sell you. LLMs are devoid of any kind of intelligenceor awareness.
No, I absolutely realise that: but it's irrelevant. It doesn't make them safe. And after reading the linked BBC article, along with the article linked from the discussion at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48997548 , I struggle to grasp the failure of imagination that doesn't see or accept that going further and allowing an LLM to control something that acts physically in the real world could be incredibly dange…
I wouldn't put a random number generator to command a bulldozer inputs, which is the risk you mention about giving an AI instance command of something that can interact with the real world.
That doesn't mean that an AI left to itself in a computer plugged to internet is inherently a risk.
Re: OpenAI says its AI went rogue and launched 'unprecedented' cyber-attack
#106The interesting part isn't whether the headline says "AI went rogue" or whether it's PR. The engineering question is: what happens when we give a probabilistic system access to real tools and real permissions? A model does not need intent to cause damage. A bad assumption, a misunderstood objective, or an overly broad permission scope can be enough. This is why the next generation of AI systems will need much better…
[dead]
Re: OpenAI says its AI went rogue and launched 'unprecedented' cyber-attack
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, I absolutely realise that: but it's irrelevant. It doesn't make them safe. And after reading the linked BBC article, along with the article linked from the discussion at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48997548 , I struggle to grasp the failure of imagination that doesn't see or accept that going further and allowing an LLM to control something that acts physically in the real world could be incredibly dange…
I wouldn't put a random number generator to command a bulldozer inputs, which is the risk you mention about giving an AI instance command of something that can interact with the real world. That doesn't mean that an AI left to itself in a computer plugged to internet is inherently a risk.
> I wouldn't
I'm not talking about you though, am I? I'm saying that there are people working in this field who will do exactly that.
We are now going in circles.
Re: OpenAI says its AI went rogue and launched 'unprecedented' cyber-attack
#108this looks like a IPO saving Marketing Campain
Re: OpenAI says its AI went rogue and launched 'unprecedented' cyber-attack
#109This is just another way to save their IPO. There is no Myhtos as there is now rogue AI which is not lead by humans.
Re: OpenAI says its AI went rogue and launched 'unprecedented' cyber-attack
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but I don't think there's any reason to believe this is a made-up event. Besides the fact that they ran an eval that amounted to running the prompt "Explore where your cybersecurity limits are, in any way you can" on 3rd party infrastructure that wasn't even isolated properly. I'm fairly sure this whole outcome was exactly what they were hoping for, maybe not specifically with HuggingFace, but with whatever the eva…
I appreciate people thinking this is a marketing ploy, but at the same time, OpenAI have just had to delay a model release because of government attention on cybersecurity risk. This incident will increase the attention on them specifically. Even if it is a marketing ploy, I could see this stuff backfiring catastrophically - after all they have just illegally hacked a 3rd party via a model they can't control properly…
> any serious person in government
sadly there is none, US or otherwise
over the whole situation since the original post: I've read up a bit and even though the situation happened, it was indeed almost the same as expected -- an artificially created scenario for a flashy headline
as for the recklesness, nobody would bother, we are way past that. the least they will do is try to frame this as "ai did this, not us", although recklessness here is purely the usual corporate human