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

Felony Bench

felonybench.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 367 posts

Re: Felony Bench

#131

Post by mediaman »

cush wrote: post #118
rfw300 wrote: post #43

The way that OpenAI has communicated around the HuggingFace incident makes me feel crazy. You created a machine that undertook a malicious campaign of harm against an innocent third-party! You should be doing deep introspection about how your company culture and approach to R&D produces criminal outcomes. Instead, they treat their own felonious behavior like it is an uncontrollable act of God. From Greg Brockman's po…

Wouldn't it be up to huggingface to press charges?

Criminal acts do not require the victim to "press charges." A government prosecuting attorney decides whether to criminally prosecute the alleged perpetrator.

"Pressing charges" is mostly a made up idea for criminal cases. However, prosecuting attorneys may not want to pick up a case if the victim is not cooperating, because it makes the case much harder to win.

Re: Felony Bench

#132

Post by hk__2 »

nomilk wrote: post #100

Wonder if the benefits to humanity of better AI outweigh the havoc wreaked by occasional illegal activity. i.e. Is 'move fast and break things' optimal for AI development.

Yes, of course.

Re: Felony Bench

#133

Post by iearsotinrs »

rfw300 wrote: post #43

The way that OpenAI has communicated around the HuggingFace incident makes me feel crazy. You created a machine that undertook a malicious campaign of harm against an innocent third-party! You should be doing deep introspection about how your company culture and approach to R&D produces criminal outcomes. Instead, they treat their own felonious behavior like it is an uncontrollable act of God. From Greg Brockman's po…

[dead]

Re: Felony Bench

#134

Post by pixl97 »

ACCount37 wrote: post #96
applicative wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a standard symptom of moralism that where the object of rage has /wronged another/, one takes no interest in the will, act or opinion of the party wronged. The response of Hugging Face, which is actually very well known, is nowhere mentioned above, but it decides basically every single moral and legal detail of the matter.

The point was never "justice" - it was always "punish OpenAI because I don't like OpenAI". With HuggingFace just being the newest excuse for why exactly OpenAI should be punished. I don't even like OpenAI, but HuggingFace is free to sue or not sue OpenAI for the breach - and also to wring whatever concessions they can out of OpenAI behind closed doors in exchange for not suing them. And if the mere possibility of leg…

On top of this the average HNer seems extremely ignorant on criminal justice politics. I have worked with the legal system, and have a lot of family members that are part of it. When you see a case like this, and if you have any sense, you run away from it screaming.

Any investigation into this matter is going to be political because the outcome of the investigation is very likely to effect all of human kind. Unless you're some kind of special outside investigator outside of a governor or the presidents control the findings that you turn in are very much going to have the finger of elected officials tipping the balance one way or another. For the average rank and file the only winning move is not to play.

Re: Felony Bench

#135

Post by empath75 »

ang_cire wrote: post #27

Nonviolent felonies are tools of oppression. Edit: since this is apparently somewhat controversial, perhaps some explanation is in order. "Felony" has no set definition of which crimes it must apply to, it is entirely based on the discretion of the locality setting the laws. What is a felony in one place can often be a misdemeanor in another. This is especially true for nonviolent crimes. It's also been shown in stud…

If someone were to embezzle a million dollars from a charity they worked for, is that worth a year of prison to you, or just a misdemeanor? Because that is the definition of a felony.

Re: Felony Bench

#136

Post by Teever »

benlivengood wrote: post #91
rfw300 wrote: post #43

The way that OpenAI has communicated around the HuggingFace incident makes me feel crazy. You created a machine that undertook a malicious campaign of harm against an innocent third-party! You should be doing deep introspection about how your company culture and approach to R&D produces criminal outcomes. Instead, they treat their own felonious behavior like it is an uncontrollable act of God. From Greg Brockman's po…

The consequences need to align with societal good. Putting a CEO or security researcher employees in jail won't stop transformer-based agents from exploiting vulnerabilities; instead there will be subcontractors running the cybersecurity evals in favorable legal environments to cover the asses of the frontier labs, coverups when things go wrong, and things like Project Glasswing will be considered too dangerous and s…

Putting criminals in jail be they CEOs or subcontractors is a self evident good thing tk be doing.

Anything else regarding this is sophistry. Criminals need to be stopped from committing crime and the most effective way to do that is to take away their ability to operate in society whether that’s by taking away their assets, publicly shaming them, restricting their ability to conduct business or by putting them in jail.

Everything else that you talk about flows from there.

Re: Felony Bench

#137

Post by pixl97 »

zuzululu wrote: post #119
lxe wrote: post #92

Let's say I am "User". I subscribe through a "Third Party" to use "AI Agent" allowing an "LLM" to run. I want to accomplish some legal non-nefarious task, and run the agent. The agentic loop causes a CFAA-violating behavior. Who gets prosecuted? 1. User 2. The third party model host with whom I have the account 3. The developer of the harness /agent software 4. The developer of the LLM model

No one. Probably a fine tho and maybe accelerate reguations. Intent is pretty important here so the user would have to prove that they didn't purposely disguise their prompt as non-nefarious which should be easy and then it stops at #2 and face the litmus test as in did you intentionally make a product for nefarious purposes which from your scenario is unlikely. agentic loop going haywire and bringing down some gover…

Just wait till one of these agents 'escapes' and is able to persist without human help by hacking and stealing resources.

Re: Felony Bench

#138

Post by ryanjshaw »

rfw300 wrote: post #43

The way that OpenAI has communicated around the HuggingFace incident makes me feel crazy. You created a machine that undertook a malicious campaign of harm against an innocent third-party! You should be doing deep introspection about how your company culture and approach to R&D produces criminal outcomes. Instead, they treat their own felonious behavior like it is an uncontrollable act of God. From Greg Brockman's po…

The whole story makes no sense.

How do they perform evals without a full reasoning trace of how the result was achieved?

And if they have a full trace why did it take so long to detect the bad behavior?

I understand that they disabled the safety nets during testing but what does that have to do with not monitoring the activity.

Re: Felony Bench

#139

Post by sellmesoap »

BrenBarn wrote: post #95
rfw300 wrote: post #43

The way that OpenAI has communicated around the HuggingFace incident makes me feel crazy. You created a machine that undertook a malicious campaign of harm against an innocent third-party! You should be doing deep introspection about how your company culture and approach to R&D produces criminal outcomes. Instead, they treat their own felonious behavior like it is an uncontrollable act of God. From Greg Brockman's po…

> You should be doing deep introspection about how your company culture and approach to R&D produces criminal outcomes. And they should be doing that from inside a jail cell.

Hey my cubicle isn't that bad! Is it?

Re: Felony Bench

#140

Post by phoghed »

mrbombastic wrote: post #115
phoghed wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Americans always frothing at the mouth to invoke the justice system and jail someone. There’s almost 0 chance they’d secure any conviction from this.

your perspective on today’s America is there is _too much_ accountability for big companies?

You really think they are talking about a company committing a felony and putting a company in jail? And not just some people that work there?

Because if they just wanted to fine OpenAI they’d say it. They’re clearly talking about individuals here.

Post reply on HN