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

301–307 of 307 posts

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#301

Post by ghosty141 »

tsimionescu wrote: post #114
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.

The company owners have one set of standards for those that work for them, and a completely different set of standards for themselves and for the company itself. If you are using AI and it causes some damage to them, then it's your fault and you'll get reprimanded/fired. If they deploy AI and it causes damage to someone else, then that's proof that AI has extraordinary capabilities that no one could predict and that…

Yeah I think we all agree that this double standard is a huge problem and has no merit to it.

Its sadly very similar to corporate vs private responsibility.

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#302

Post by Dylan16807 »

account42 wrote: post #297
Dylan16807 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The practical answer is you make sure damages are always covered by insurance, and as long as nobody acts maliciously or with extreme negligence there won't be any need for prison time.

Practical in what sense? This is exactly how you get EPA superfund sites while the executives that profited from the offending activity remain unaffected.

Practical in that we get to have widespread self driving cars. Real ones where you can look away from the road.

Do you have an "offending activity" in mind? The existence of car accidents isn't one. If you want the manufacturer to be liable for every mistake the car does, that's fine. But since that will increase the price of self-driving, likely as a subscription, it basically resolves into a type of insurance.

If the self-driving designers perform actual wrongdoing, that's a separate issue that can be handled like any other recallable hazard.

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#303

Post by collingreen »

BloodyIron wrote: post #94
collingreen wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Didn't they literally just give you and example of those who do?

My claim is they don't actually believe and instead use the claim to cover/excuse bad behavior.

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#304

Post by Frieren »

rcxdude wrote: post #143
Frieren wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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).

> Intent requires at least that you were deliberately doing the criminal act

So, they did something that benefits them by mistake. I would like to see a person would be judged in that situation. I can imagine that the bar to put someone in prison is way lower than to give a fine to a mega-corporation.

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#305

Post by rcxdude »

Frieren wrote: post #304
rcxdude wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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).

> Intent requires at least that you were deliberately doing the criminal act So, they did something that benefits them by mistake. I would like to see a person would be judged in that situation. I can imagine that the bar to put someone in prison is way lower than to give a fine to a mega-corporation.

You can imagine what you like. I can imagine a million examples of people being judged not guilty because intent could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. There are of course many injustices in the 'justice' system, but I would prefer to discuss the concrete details instead of just vibes.

Here's one case: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/342/246/ where someone who took some metal they believed to be abandoned was aquitted on that basis, though this particular case made it to the supreme court because the lower courts tried to rule that the fact that he didn't intend to steal them didn't matter.

Also, I don't think there's a strong argument that hacking huggingface did benefit them. If you could prove it was a deliberate ploy to market their models, then perhaps you could argue they expected to benefit. Otherwise, you could argue that it's negatively affected their reputation.

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#306

Post by rcxdude »

mirekrusin wrote: post #279
rcxdude wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

OpenAI is in trouble then, no?

If there's evidence they deliberately did this, yes. If they've lied in other cases then it might make their testimony that they didn't intend this less credible, but also OpenAI as a whole is not going to face criminal charges, so it'll also depend on the situation of whatever individuals do get charged, if it does go to court.

Re: QBittorrent breaks out of sandbox to commit crimes

#307

Post by tga_d »

apefulsin wrote: post #273
giov4 wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

just read about it, what a sad story, thanks for the reference. looks like he did great stuff. for context: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz "As a programmer, Swartz helped develop the web feed format RSS; the technical architecture for Creative Commons, an organization dedicated to creating copyright licenses; and the Python website framework web.py. Swartz helped define the syntax of the lightweight marku…

I've heard he was more like the Elon Musk of the open source world. He didn't co-found Reddit, he was placed there by Y Combinator staff to the protests of its actual founders. Maybe some of the other projects he's credited for also were like that.

I've never heard anyone in the internet freedom or open source communities speak ill of him, and something tells me a 14 year old was not getting involved in writing the RSS spec to steal clout for financial gain.
Post reply on HN