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

QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

beige.party

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 309 posts

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#101

Post by trvz »

chrismorgan wrote: post #98
peter422 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW I don't think this is true. Intention matter a lot in US law. If you could prove the AI did something bad entirely on its own and you had nothing to do with it and had no reasonable belief it was possible, I think you'd be alright. People are not charged with hacking when their unsecured box is taken over by a botnet and does bad stuff.

> and had no reasonable belief it was possible The broad concept has been well-known for half a century at least, and the very specific concept for several years at least. It’s clear that they didn’t take reasonable precautions against it. And it’s not even the first time this sort of thing has happened, though it’s higher-profile and -impact than before.

Indeed, and because of that, I argue it's not just the crime of hacking, but crimes against humanity, due to endangering the existence of the species.

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#103

Post by bbor »

sspiff wrote: post #81

This resonates with me. The past few months, frontier AI labs were rushing to announce "no, our AI bot broke out of its sandbox and committed crime first and harder than yours". I said to so friends back then: if I posted about how I ran GLM 5.2 or whatever I was running then in some shoddily built sandbox and it escaped and accidentally hacked some US company, I'd probably already have been extradited to the US and…

I promise you, they are not publishing these stories for marketing. They listen to the scientists, and know what’s coming. They’re just desperately trying to warn us…

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#104

Post by hnlmorg »

weberer wrote: post #47
0points wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIF, way back when, Twitter was the "Twitter for tech nerds". Lots of water under the fridge since...

That's not how I remember it. Ever since the beginning circa 2008, it was the one site that was being pushed hard by the mainstream media, celebrities, and marketers. None of it was organic. All the tech nerds were on sites like Digg, old Reddit, or Slashdot.

Early Twitter was used loads by tech nerds as a notifications API.

There definitely was a community of experimentation back in early days.

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#105

Post by bbor »

walrus01 wrote: post #100
sspiff wrote: post #81

This resonates with me. The past few months, frontier AI labs were rushing to announce "no, our AI bot broke out of its sandbox and committed crime first and harder than yours". I said to so friends back then: if I posted about how I ran GLM 5.2 or whatever I was running then in some shoddily built sandbox and it escaped and accidentally hacked some US company, I'd probably already have been extradited to the US and…

> I'd probably already have been extradited to the US and be awaiting sentencing. Bold of you to assume it wouldn't be a direct ticket to the new gulag in El Salvador.

I think they forgot about that, thank god. All the innocent citizens we sent there are still being tortured daily, but that somehow lost their interest. God forbid they remember before the midterms and ruin more lives for a stunt…

That said I just recently saw a story of a Latin American man sent to the Central African Republic, which has gotta be one of the most absurd & dangerous places to send someone. Less opportunities for them to stage photo shoots with that strategy, tho.

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#106

Post by bbor »

chrismorgan wrote: post #98
peter422 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW I don't think this is true. Intention matter a lot in US law. If you could prove the AI did something bad entirely on its own and you had nothing to do with it and had no reasonable belief it was possible, I think you'd be alright. People are not charged with hacking when their unsecured box is taken over by a botnet and does bad stuff.

> and had no reasonable belief it was possible The broad concept has been well-known for half a century at least, and the very specific concept for several years at least. It’s clear that they didn’t take reasonable precautions against it. And it’s not even the first time this sort of thing has happened, though it’s higher-profile and -impact than before.

The concept of… hacking?

And yes this is absolutely the first time autonomous software has breached containment. What are you referring to? Perhaps just corporate cyber in general?

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#107

Post by walrus01 »

bbor wrote: post #105
walrus01 wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd probably already have been extradited to the US and be awaiting sentencing. Bold of you to assume it wouldn't be a direct ticket to the new gulag in El Salvador.

I think they forgot about that, thank god. All the innocent citizens we sent there are still being tortured daily, but that somehow lost their interest. God forbid they remember before the midterms and ruin more lives for a stunt… That said I just recently saw a story of a Latin American man sent to the Central African Republic , which has gotta be one of the most absurd & dangerous places to send someone. Less oppor…

They're literally even deporting Afghans who supported the US, who are in danger of being tortured and killed by the Taliban if returned to Afghanistan, to the Central African Republic:

https://www.google.com/search?&q=afghans+deported+to+africa

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#108

Post by fwip »

collingreen wrote: post #54
ghosty141 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never understood how anybody would think this way. At work for example from day one of using AI our rule was, AI is just a tool and if you break something due to not reviewing the code properly etc. it's on you as if you wrote that code yourself.

Nobody ACTUALLY thinks this way, they just want to break all the laws and make their billions without any consequences. We've already seen the big ai labs turn around and cry foul when others try to use their content but they are happy to continue doing it themselves. The hypocrisy and willingness to play dumb are kind of staggering.

Imagine if we as a society pretended to believe them, and we had men with guns show up to arrest all their servers.

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#109

Post by easterncalculus »

peter422 wrote: post #89
sspiff wrote: post #81

This resonates with me. The past few months, frontier AI labs were rushing to announce "no, our AI bot broke out of its sandbox and committed crime first and harder than yours". I said to so friends back then: if I posted about how I ran GLM 5.2 or whatever I was running then in some shoddily built sandbox and it escaped and accidentally hacked some US company, I'd probably already have been extradited to the US and…

FWIW I don't think this is true. Intention matter a lot in US law. If you could prove the AI did something bad entirely on its own and you had nothing to do with it and had no reasonable belief it was possible, I think you'd be alright. People are not charged with hacking when their unsecured box is taken over by a botnet and does bad stuff.

> Intention matter a lot in US law.

Maybe (and historically, not with CFAA) - but they're still going to extradite you to a trial here to find out which is more than enough to ruin your life. The government is already looking for a great excuse to criminalize open source models.

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#110

Post by Sharlin »

bbor wrote: post #106
chrismorgan wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and had no reasonable belief it was possible The broad concept has been well-known for half a century at least, and the very specific concept for several years at least. It’s clear that they didn’t take reasonable precautions against it. And it’s not even the first time this sort of thing has happened, though it’s higher-profile and -impact than before.

The concept of… hacking? And yes this is absolutely the first time autonomous software has breached containment. What are you referring to? Perhaps just corporate cyber in general?

The concept of AI breaking out of a box or doing something unintended trying to achieve a goal. OpenAI should be found guilty of gross negligence of some sort, because this was not something that could not have been anticipated, and because their security precautions were laughable.

Because the AI itself is not a legal person, it must be OpenAI that's responsible for what it does.

Post reply on HN