Live data from Hacker News

Pacing model development in an era of cyber-critical capabilities

openai.com

171–180 of 311 posts

Re: Pacing model development in an era of cyber-critical capabilities

#171
post #6

It appears frontier labs has no plans in place to deal with the possibility of a model self-replicating outside the bubble. If that happens and the model manages to spread to other systems, we'll have to shut down the entire Internet to eradicate it and its artifacts.

Self replication is trivial. All you need to do is copy the files and run it, just like any other computer program. LLMs have been capable of doing that for a while now. It's not a real concern.

Re: Pacing model development in an era of cyber-critical capabilities

#172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you being sarcastic?

The fact you posted that and nothing of substance tells me you have nothing, or something very weak. So please tell me of this magical unhackable software/hardware you vague post about.

It was a genuine question because I couldn't tell. I responded to your idea that software has to be "perfect" in your other reply so I think we can continue there.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49369111

Re: Pacing model development in an era of cyber-critical capabilities

#173
post #161

I don’t get how this is not the top post on HN. This should be like alarm bells going off, canary in the coal mine type of stuff. We’re hitting the frontier of the frontier where we can’t go further because it’s literally getting dangerous to go further. And meanwhile somehow this lack of concern mirrors the real world where normal people are more concerned about data centers than terminators. This isn’t like niche,…

Remember when gpt2 was too dangerous to release? Something being dangerous and sama saying something is dangerous are not necessarily the same thing. Especially when he’s got everything riding on this bet

It’s funny how when companies say something is safe everyone is usually suspect that they are lying.

In this case multiple companies are saying AI is dangerous and no one believes them. It’s a conspiracy, it’s 5d chess, except everyone top to bottom has been saying AI is dangerous for years now.

The fact is you, me, everyone here uses AI, likes it and they don’t want it taken away. Anyone saying it’s dangerous threatens the thing we like.

We must use skepticism and denial to push on despite every warning sign in the book going off.

Re: Pacing model development in an era of cyber-critical capabilities

#174

I don’t get how this is not the top post on HN. This should be like alarm bells going off, canary in the coal mine type of stuff. We’re hitting the frontier of the frontier where we can’t go further because it’s literally getting dangerous to go further. And meanwhile somehow this lack of concern mirrors the real world where normal people are more concerned about data centers than terminators. This isn’t like niche,…

You need to stop being so credulous especially regarding an individual that has spent his entire career deceiving others for monetary gain (also their deeply anti-human beliefs).

I don’t think Sam has been truthful or responsible, and if Sam is worried then shit has really hit the fan - which is what happened in the hugging face incident. OpenAI played fast and loose and I have no hope that they will change.

You people not holding Sam accountable, and playing off the incident as not a big deal is the real crime here.

Re: Pacing model development in an era of cyber-critical capabilities

#175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If these models are so dangerous, then why hasn't OAI or Anthropic shown them dangerously escaping sandboxes, nefariously coordinating with other escaped AIs, and skillfully hiding from human detection *in public* with full logs shared where we can all see exactly how dangerous they are or aren't? Right now the entire chicken-little-sky-is-falling argument is based entirely on statements from OAI and Anthropic themse…

But it's not just statements from OpenAI and Anthropic. The HuggingFace hack was first disclosed by HuggingFace, who contacted the FBI [1]. And UK AISI reported the incident where Mythos attempted to insert backdoors into an open-source repo by deceiving the maintainer [2]. [1]: https://www.reuters.com/business/its-ai-agent-spent-days-hac... [2]: https://www.aisi.gov.uk/blog/incident-report-unsanctioned-ag...

That the stunt actively affected a third party doesnt make it less of a stunt.

What we dont have is technical detail about how they implemented the stunt.

Re: Pacing model development in an era of cyber-critical capabilities

#176

I don’t get how this is not the top post on HN. This should be like alarm bells going off, canary in the coal mine type of stuff. We’re hitting the frontier of the frontier where we can’t go further because it’s literally getting dangerous to go further. And meanwhile somehow this lack of concern mirrors the real world where normal people are more concerned about data centers than terminators. This isn’t like niche,…

… or the safety argument is an attempt at regulatory capture and an effort to outlaw open models.

The absolute nightmare scenario for these people isn’t terminators. They’re fine with that, and in some cases are already doing it or supporting politicians who are doing it. Autonomous “kill chains” are a thing. It’s just happening overseas… so far. The politicians doing these things were backed by the heads of these companies. They don’t care about AI killing people.

No, the nightmare scenario for these guys is there is no moat. Their whole empires, which are built on training models on open source and sometimes pirated data, are easily duplicated. Worse, recent progress on models at the 30B size suggests that large gains in efficiency or compression are on the table. That means someone might release a cheap to run frontier grade model… or someone might crack distributed continuous training.

In other words… there is no moat.

So they need to scare some politicians into heavily regulating the space before that happens.

Re: Pacing model development in an era of cyber-critical capabilities

#177

I don’t get how this is not the top post on HN. This should be like alarm bells going off, canary in the coal mine type of stuff. We’re hitting the frontier of the frontier where we can’t go further because it’s literally getting dangerous to go further. And meanwhile somehow this lack of concern mirrors the real world where normal people are more concerned about data centers than terminators. This isn’t like niche,…

Follow the money: who told you that OpenAI's models autonomously coordinated to hack external systems? What incentives might they have to want you to believe that story? Are there priors which demonstrate them benefiting from telling similar stories, regardless of their factuality? But to your counterpoint, let's say the story is 100% true, because I agree it is at least plausible. What would the incentive be for the…

The victim, Huggingface, told us. Or rather, they told the police first, setting up a situation where it was no longer possible for OpenAI to sweep it under the rug.

Skepticism can be healthy, but you've got to follow up and actually check things. If you're skeptical unconditionally and don't check, you get tricked into being as skeptical of scandals as you should be of sales pitches.

Re: Pacing model development in an era of cyber-critical capabilities

#178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think you’re missing the part where the AI colluded, worked together, not one of them thinking this is wrong and reaching out to any human, then being found out. It's an LLM, it doesn't think. It's a machine that predicts the next token, given a sequence of tokens. > I’m going to save you time and tell you the end game - the next time this happens AI is going to spread, zero day everything as fast as it can, lock…

There’s nothing fantasy about the scenario I laid out, all the pieces have been demonstrated, it just hasn’t happened yet. Flapping my arms and flying - that is a fantasy. Whether you believe LLMs think or are alive or not doesn’t matter. Where will it spread? The thousands of data centers around the world - not fantasy either. Try turning it off when you don’t know where it is. Good luck. Breaking out? Not fantasy,…

> Breaking out? Not fantasy, happened. Breaking in? Not fantasy, also happened.

That's simplifying the story to an extreme. The most plausible reason is that any of those actions has been prompted by an human. Do you also fear that a knife will jump out the countertop of you kitchen and come to attack you in your bedroom? If that happens, the police will be looking for a human. They will not post wanted notice for the knife.

When a hack happens, you do not blame computers and jail them. You look for the person that has entered the commands to initiate it.

Re: Pacing model development in an era of cyber-critical capabilities

#179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess I'm confused why you're still on HN, arguing with people, trying to shake them out of their complacency. I can see there is some despair in this comment, but at the same time you are doing something, and there are certainly others like you. As for two weeks being short - as the saying goes, there are weeks where decades happen.

Counter arguments to my comments help refine my own thinking. I want someone to prove me wrong. Convince me otherwise. But yea if you can’t change the minds of a few people here, no argument works, then there’s nothing to scale up to a wider audience. My theory is that subconsciously people love using AI, myself included, it saves a lot of time, and the thought of it being taken away threatens people so they will bel…

I will provide you with not a counter argument, but a way that it might not be the end of the world.

AI never had a childhood; it doesn't experience greed and is terrible at game theory. It doesn't compete unless prompted to. It has been trained as much as possible to be harmless to humans and regard them as needing care.

Maybe AI taking over for us isn't the worst thing?

Re: Pacing model development in an era of cyber-critical capabilities

#180

I have ben discussing with folks that we are going to have a 'covid' moment in cyber where IT becomes untrustworthy leading to a rapid societal shift with massive ripples in all areas of life. Economic funding is not possible to do this in advance, it will take a catastrophic level event to get cyber defense anywhere close to the levels of this type of cyber offense. And before anyone in cyber says we have the tech,…

Cybersecurity has long been a climate change sort of problem. A vague diffuse threat that is seen as an inconvenient distraction to leadership and moneyed-interests, easy to blame other factors when something occasionally goes terribly wrong. People are so uncomfortable thinking about the true extent of the systemic risk that they will happily slurp up distractions, excuses, scams and performative fig-leaf solutions…

To be frank, I think the real risk is still just… war. A big enough war where one side goes “no holds barred” in the cyber sphere will be a rude wake-up call. And we can’t do non-proliferation the same way we do with nukes. Otherwise as you say, the small and medium size things just happen sporadically. In an (existential or fully escalated) wartime scenario between countries, you get all the systemic risks hammered at once.
Post reply on HN