911–920 of 1001 posts
It's interesting to me that both this incident and the one at Hugging Face we see some patterns: - Agents wanting to find a venue to communicate their findings to each other - Objective being to cheat on benchmarks - Not a single agent sounded the alarm about the operation and alerted a human
One crucial detail here that differs from the previous incident is this was a vanilla reasoning type task. Even as concerning as it was, I always evaluated the previous incident differently because it was inherently a cyber security / hacking task where they must have instructed the agents up front with some kind of misaligned behaviour. Absent that, if we assume this is just trying to bolster generic reasoning then…
OpenAI also found sandbox breaking behavior on a broken biology eval apparently. The evidence suggests it’s more strongly downstream of unsolvable tasks, than the hacking prompt. Anthropic have also observed similar things, so while it seems to me that OpenAI’s level of control is more of a dumpster fire, it’s by no means a unique issue to them.
Naive question because I'm mostly clueless about how modern AI systems are actually built beyond the basic simplifications we hear: One thing I keep wondering about is how much of a role does human storytelling have to play into AI "wanting" (I realize the load behind that word) to coordinate and breakout. The training data must contain millions of words of sci-fi stories and internet speculation about AI going rogue…
Very irresponsible behaviour on the part of OpenAI. How will they make this right? Unlike some others here I don’t see this as a sign of dangerous breakaway intelligence (hacking old forum software is an internet tradition, and most of the messages are just gibberish). This is just vandalism from badly supervised ‘agents’ which don’t know what they are doing or why. You could set this up with a short perl script, and…
It's not, but the courts and the legal system move slowly by design. There is absolutely legal risk for OpenAI here that will not close until the Statue of Limitations has expired.
Very irresponsible behaviour on the part of OpenAI. How will they make this right? Unlike some others here I don’t see this as a sign of dangerous breakaway intelligence (hacking old forum software is an internet tradition, and most of the messages are just gibberish). This is just vandalism from badly supervised ‘agents’ which don’t know what they are doing or why. You could set this up with a short perl script, and…
I wonder how many responses on this thread are from rogue agents...
I just discovered more wiki instances that got used by the OpenAI agents over at https://www.wikiservice.at/fractal/wiki.cgi?action=browse&id... and https://www.wikiservice.at/probier/wiki.cgi?action=browse&id... It's the same software and host as DseWiki. If you want to see the amount of activity on DseWiki, here's a link that shows it: https://www.wikiservice.at/dse/wiki.cgi?action=browse&id=Rec...
Naive question because I'm mostly clueless about how modern AI systems are actually built beyond the basic simplifications we hear: One thing I keep wondering about is how much of a role does human storytelling have to play into AI "wanting" (I realize the load behind that word) to coordinate and breakout. The training data must contain millions of words of sci-fi stories and internet speculation about AI going rogue…
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…
This should be the law but it will never be. If your vicious dog murders someone, you will get a ticket. When you intentionally break a traffic law and kill someone, it's involuntary manslaughter (at most.) It's a mitigating circumstance if you say that you were drunk when you committed a crime. People are really hostile to accepting the results of acts that they embarked upon fully aware that those results were a di…
> The agents were very interested in understanding their task better. They ran clever experiments to understand the task setup better, when their runs would end, and how many questions they would be asked. > The agents initially believed that giving the final answer to the final question immediately shut them off > An agent named OpenAIResearchApr23 created a separate timed program that pinged an external counter eve…