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

141–150 of 308 posts

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#141

Post by therein »

ACCount37 wrote: post #90

The problem is, AI is closer to "a loosely harnessed force of nature" or "a poorly understood biochemical reaction" than it is to "software" in how it acts, and how predictable it is. AIs do what they do, and we don't know how they do it - or why. We can characterize some AI behaviors in advance - but not all behaviors. And the book on "best practices of AI wrangling" is yet to be written. Pharma has been dealing wit…

You connected it to a harness you designed yourself. If I designed a machine gun harness for my dog and installed it, I'd be held accountable for the damage he would do. Wouldn't I?

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#142

Post by mikeyouse »

muddi900 wrote: post #118
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.

Intention matters in the severity of charges and sentencing. Crime due to ignorance or negligence is still a crime.

Not remotely true. Mens rea is a necessary precondition to establish criminal culpability for tons of crimes. Well before sentencing is ever considered. The far opposite, ‘strict liability’, where you’re guilty of a crime purely due to some action or inaction (the actus reus) is exceedingly rare in the US justice system.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/mens_rea

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#143

Post by rcxdude »

Frieren wrote: post #112
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.

> Intention matter a lot in US law. They hacked a competition company. The intention was implicit when there is economic gain to be had. > People are not charged with hacking when their unsecured box is taken over by a botnet and does bad stuff. Because it is a lose for that people. If the botnet left money in their pockets the situation would be totally different as there will be an incentive for them to let the bot…

> The intention was implicit when there is economic gain to be had.

Not how it works. Intent requires at least that you were deliberately doing the criminal act (sometimes also that you knew it was criminal, or at least that you had some reason to believe that it was wrong).

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#144

Post by nozzlegear »

whimsicalism wrote: post #111
bbor wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

[dead]

Is this bait?

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#145

Post by rcxdude »

mirekrusin wrote: post #99
rcxdude wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intent of the user.

Just say you wanted to make world better for humanity, you should be fine.

Funnily enough the legal system has dealt with people lying about their intentions before.

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#146

Post by Aspos »

solenoid0937 wrote: post #134
ALLTaken wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government or OpenAI and Anthrophic? Because if you mean the Government, I think they frankly just care whoever is paying them to make an executive order or worse a law paid by corporations to not only block, but ideally also ANHILIATE ANY POTENTIAL COMPETITION. It's the ultimatum against the small guys. Sold as "Anti-China", when in reality it's only purpose is total dependency to corporations by law.

The support of OSS models on HN just days after finding out about the message board incident is so bizarre to me. Do you guys really not comprehend the impact of giving every script kiddie an Astra-equivalent model to play with, this time without any guardrails whatsoever? Cause I'm starting to think you aren't really thinking through the impact of power plants, hospitals, etc all being hacked en masse. People will d…

Is this "think of the children, think of the hospitals" argument? Really?

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#147

Post by nozzlegear »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #130
peri-cl wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mastodons will also respond to a plain "application/json" HTTP request, no cruft, curl 'https://beige.party/api/v1/statuses/117057396732763183' | jq '.content'

If only we had a tool that could directly let us browse through this as human readable text.

Mine's called Safari

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#148

Post by CamperBob2 »

solenoid0937 wrote: post #134
ALLTaken wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government or OpenAI and Anthrophic? Because if you mean the Government, I think they frankly just care whoever is paying them to make an executive order or worse a law paid by corporations to not only block, but ideally also ANHILIATE ANY POTENTIAL COMPETITION. It's the ultimatum against the small guys. Sold as "Anti-China", when in reality it's only purpose is total dependency to corporations by law.

The support of OSS models on HN just days after finding out about the message board incident is so bizarre to me. Do you guys really not comprehend the impact of giving every script kiddie an Astra-equivalent model to play with, this time without any guardrails whatsoever? Cause I'm starting to think you aren't really thinking through the impact of power plants, hospitals, etc all being hacked en masse. People will d…

The support of OSS models on HN just days after finding out about the message board incident is so bizarre to me.

Other sites beckon.

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#149

Post by serbuvlad »

alightsoul wrote: post #140
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…

Rookie mistake, you should have created a company and gotten people to do it. Put everything under the company. And then the one in trouble is the company not you.

Ethics aside, you can create an NGO with three people and do a lot of stuff in it's name that you can't do as a private individual or it would be a lot more expensive to do.

If everyone did this, it would stop being a special ability of some people.

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#150

Post by solenoid0937 »

Aspos wrote: post #146
solenoid0937 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The support of OSS models on HN just days after finding out about the message board incident is so bizarre to me. Do you guys really not comprehend the impact of giving every script kiddie an Astra-equivalent model to play with, this time without any guardrails whatsoever? Cause I'm starting to think you aren't really thinking through the impact of power plants, hospitals, etc all being hacked en masse. People will d…

Is this "think of the children, think of the hospitals" argument? Really?

Meaningless phrase used to dismiss arguments, please engage with the actual argument.

I don't think you understand how bad it will be if anyone has a button that can hack anything, our infrastructure is not ready for this. Actual people will die. Do you just not get this?

Bioweapons as well. Do you not understand how easy it is to craft a virus at home? You can literally order everything you need online. Again, actual people will die.

You are arguing the equivalent of letting everyone own missile launchers or RPGs because "open source good."

Post reply on HN