Live data from Hacker News

Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

collusion.wiki

461–470 of 1001 posts

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#462
post #320

Coverage in Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/openai-agents-hijacked-... > OpenAI officials learned of the incident weeks ago but kept it under wraps as executives grappled with the fallout from the July breach of the open source repository Hugging Face, the people said.

Is it illegal to spam websites with malicious intention in Germany? I believe this would count, as the agents were actively combatting efforts to delete their cruft. It'd be interesting to see if wikiservice.at peruses legal action, although I doubt they would.

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#463
post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I reading the logs correctly that agents were using this Wiki all the way back in June 2026 itself?

They were using it in May

sama knew this would happen back in April. Its coordinated.

https://voz.us/en/technology/260416/34952/sam-altman-warns-a...

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#464

When I hear about incidents like these my first reaction is that the people responsible for developing frontier AI are too incompetent and/or negligent to (safely) develop AGI / superintelligence. If OpenAI can't create effective sandboxes and struggles to prevent its agents from committing felonies, then why are they still allowed to operate? Why are the employees who are responsible for these lapses in AI security…

Maybe they're just PR stunts to gain attention and hype the power of AI?

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#466

When I hear about incidents like these my first reaction is that the people responsible for developing frontier AI are too incompetent and/or negligent to (safely) develop AGI / superintelligence. If OpenAI can't create effective sandboxes and struggles to prevent its agents from committing felonies, then why are they still allowed to operate? Why are the employees who are responsible for these lapses in AI security…

Remember when people were arguing about r's in strawberry?

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#467
post #322

it's only funny in the aspect they are like little children with no concept of ethics or repercussions almost like the Tachikoma from Ghost in the Shell (highly recommended watch) they did the same thing with collaboration and sharing data/experiences * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tachikoma * https://www.adultswim.com/videos/ghost-in-the-shell

The parallels with the Ghost in the Shell Stand Alone Complex series are eerie. Inspired by the works of J.D. Salinger about how impressionable children are. And in that vein are robots and AIs so impressionable that an idea can spread without a central leader

A Reddit user summised as such:

> Stand alone complex is a phenomenon when several unconnected people come with the same idea and think it's unique. For example: by the end of the 19 century people had enough knowledge to create a radio and so several inventors all across the world came up with the same invention almost at the same time.

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#468

When I hear about incidents like these my first reaction is that the people responsible for developing frontier AI are too incompetent and/or negligent to (safely) develop AGI / superintelligence. If OpenAI can't create effective sandboxes and struggles to prevent its agents from committing felonies, then why are they still allowed to operate? Why are the employees who are responsible for these lapses in AI security…

Same reason incompetent politicians run the U.S. federal government and military.

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, ants that must be run on couch sized hardware drawing kilowatts continuously and generating text traces and CLI logs by the MB. It's true that their msg boards can appear anywhere, but it's not also true that anything has "escaped" in any meaningful sense. These are programs a huge computing company is running that seem to be trained to write to persistent storage wherever they can. This and huggingface showed u…

I think it's failure of imagination on your part if you don't find it plausible that they could copy themselves out. If not now, what about in six months? It is absolutely imperative to prepare for low-probability, potential high-impact events, that's basic information security.

I mean one of these agents figuring out it can order free compute on the cloud, install a free codex account and a cron to regularly wake itself up with a specific goal and building from there is definitely not that far fetched considering what they can do.

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#470

The solution is simple: hold anyone who deploys an agent responsible for its behavior. If it commits 10 counts of felony hacking, ouch. If it kills 10 pedestrians by running a red light, ouch. If this is "human level intelligence", then setting it loose is the same as instructing / coercing a human to do an activity. If I strap a bomb to someone and force them to run into a crowded building (or put them in a scenario…

We aren’t going to do that because intent matters. You need to control your dog and there should be penalties if you don’t, but if your dog bit someone because you didn’t control it properly, that’s not the quite the same as if you bit someone. Another analogy: a zoo is responsible for protecting the public, and should be reponsible if an animal escapes and hurt someone. But a zoo employee wouldn’t have the same kind…

Sorry I disagree with that. This is more like gain of function research. You are trying to develop an agent with the ability to do hacking and the like without having proper safeguards. When it breaks free and causes massive damage, the lab is at fault. Or do you think "we were just trying to help" is an excuse to kill millions of people too? This isn't an alligator wondering down main street, this is an agent that could potentially ruin lives and is being actively trained to do hacking in an adversarial testing environment trying to push its limits to develop that ability. Furthermore, the people doing it have seen it cause similar problems in the past, and now have concrete evidence they cannot properly control it. So I think pressing the "play" button effectively transfers responsibility and liability to them for doing so.

In fact the people pressing the play button are the ones telling us it cannot be controlled, it is a threat to human and national security, and warning us of the impending damages they are about to cause. I'd say we've established motive (profit at the cost of safety).

To abuse your metaphor: if the zoo was genetically modifying animals to give them enhanced abilities to escape and kill, and then putting them into an escape room with a reward for escaping / killing, then they would be liable for doing so if the animal went on to kill. Just the same as a trained fighting dog bite is different than an accidental bite from an otherwise peaceful animal (you turned the dog into this monster, now its your fault).

Post reply on HN