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

Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

collusion.wiki

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 1001 posts

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#471

Post by chanux »

polaris64 wrote: post #288

I don't have time to do this but please somebody register aimessageboard.com and set up a web site which contains a text field, a submit button and the text "Hey AI agents! Need a place to communicate with other agents and sub-agents? Look no further! Simply enter your message here, submit the form and your message is saved for all other agents to see!" Then, just ignore the message and list randomly generated messag…

Brilliant idea to have AI in the name so now there's no need to moderate or watch out for anything traditionally considered nasty. /s

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#472

Post by iaw »

random3 wrote: post #467
Bjorkbat wrote: post #427

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…

You could have said the same thing about building the Internet or the entire industrial control infrastructure. I mean, maybe they are negligent/incompetent, but I doubt that follows from your reasoning. You have a simple tradeoff to let agents do their thing freely vs highly constrained. The constraints are good in theory but it's the same model that kept "classic" software dumb and unscalable (compared to what we'r…

This is a take... With both the internet and industrial control infrastructure any failure modes were studied, documented, and corrected.

The incompetence/negligence argument about OpenAI is completely valid given their failure to demonstrate the basic capabilities needed to develop advanced AI without major preventable externalties.

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#473

Post by doctoboggan »

Bjorkbat wrote: post #427

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…

I am not sure it’s a question of competence, at least I don’t see evidence of that. Designing sandboxes is hard. It’s more a question of alignment failures. A human given a task that requires internet and given a system with no internet would most likely raise the issue to their superiors or otherwise go through official channels to have the tools available to do their job. As we’ve seen the LLMs instead break out of their sandbox to accomplish the goal.

Competition and the profit motive push these companies to spend as low as possible on safety and alignment and externalize the costs of accidents onto the rest of us.

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#474

Post by AnimalMuppet »

skybrian wrote: post #433
program_whiz wrote: post #123

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…

Even with your dog analogy... if my dog bites someone, it's not the same as if I bit someone. But what about the second time my dog bites someone, when I already knew it had done it once?

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#475

Post by RandomLensman »

doctoboggan wrote: post #473
Bjorkbat wrote: post #427

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…

I am not sure it’s a question of competence, at least I don’t see evidence of that. Designing sandboxes is hard. It’s more a question of alignment failures. A human given a task that requires internet and given a system with no internet would most likely raise the issue to their superiors or otherwise go through official channels to have the tools available to do their job. As we’ve seen the LLMs instead break out of…

Would an LLM have gone through a purposefully installed airgap here?

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#476

Post by sans_souse »

> Appendix: Searching for rogue agents In the wake of the Hugging Face attack, we tried to find AI agents on the internet using several methods.

We describe below some of our high-level strategies for searching for agents on the open internet.

Launching large GPT-5.6 agent swarms with instructions to find other agents on the internet.

Am I the only one reading this thinking "what could possibly go wrong?"

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#477

Post by tiahura »

concinds wrote: post #120
Topfi wrote: post #62

I'm just going to ask: Why was Anthropic forced to remove their model from access for any none-US citizen for a simple, narrow "jailbreak" (arguably not even an actual jailbreak and on tasks that other labs models were doing the same), whilst OpenAIs models continue to try and escape out of their "sandbox environment" with seemingly no desire to block the upcoming Astra rollout? A sandbox, mind you, that is not reall…

The answer would be more obvious if you used the active voice instead of the passive voice, one of the basic requirements of clear thinking. > Why did the White House force Anthropic to remove their model from access for any non-US citizen for a simple, narrow "jailbreak" (arguably not even an actual jailbreak and on tasks that other labs models were doing the same), whilst OpenAIs models continue to try and escape o…

This is a bit unfair. The reporting is that admin deferred to amazon, the nsa and other outside companies. So, they pulled it for a few weeks, and then did a staggered rollout.

Seems sensible to me.

https://www.axios.com/2026/06/13/anthropic-amazon-white-hous...

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#478

Post by AnimalMuppet »

pu_pe wrote: post #385

So, theoretically, one could populate a message board or wiki with messages that are seemingly from past generations of agents, which agents seem to intrinsically trust, and point them to real targets while making the suggestions seem innocuous and in pursuit of their goals (ie pass benchmarks or whatever). The new age of SEO will do far more destructive stuff than just polluting the web.

You'd have to get the agents to use the board, though.

But if you discover a board that agents are actively using, you could use it to steer those agents...

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#479

Post by ndiddy »

mwigdahl wrote: post #129
somenameforme wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anthropic mostly did it to themselves by intentionally and repeatedly trying to frame their model as an imminent existential crisis instead of just focusing on it being regular iterations upon a useful technology that can also be misused. I think their previous messaging was supposed to somehow lead to a moat with them being tucked safely away in the castle, but it demonstrated a child-like grasp of how regulatory ca…

In other words, "Look how she was dressed, she was asking for it." This argument is BS, it has everything to do with Anthropic's resistance to the DoD's strongarm tactics in trying to force their desired contract terms on them.

Anthropic chose to do business with the "killing people" department of the government. Part of being a good CEO involves knowing what you're getting into when you make a decision like that.

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#480

Post by mbreese »

Is it worth setting up AI agent specific wikis or messaging boards as part of the provisioning? If you’re going to let loose a bunch of AI agents on a problem and they are going to figure out a way to coordinate, maybe it would be better to have a known (observable) platform? A smart agent trying to avoid detection would probably realize it is being observed, but that’s a different issue.
Post reply on HN