191–200 of 612 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, why there's no accountability? Even if there's no intent, it's still a cyber attack.
It’s interesting that a lot of U.S. law requires intent. If you just give AI your objective without specifying the means, and the AI violates a bunch of laws requiring intent, but neither the AI nor the person can be prosecuted, this is very convenient.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd eat a shoe if that ever happened, at least under the Trump DOJ. Two big reasons. OpenAI has more data, and more ability to tease secrets of politicians out of that data than nearly anyone on earth. OpenAI has an automated hacking genie that governments want to use against their enemies. Sam to Trump: "You know, some people have been saying they want to bring charges against me, but you know, I've got the best dig…
Trump's secrets are already out there, and his supporters really don't care. They never will at this point. He's not vulnerable to blackmail.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No harm, no foul. Dog owners are on the hook for damages resulting from their dogs, but there must be some damage in the first place. If the dog gets loose and goes in your fenced backyard, disregarding your "no trespassing" sign, you can't punish the dog owner just because. Hacking into a server is closer to the latter. At best rubygems can claim some cleanup costs.
That's not really true. Unauthorized access to a system is a crime regardless if there was damage. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1030
I'd argue they intentionally accessed systems they weren't meant to as they were the ones running the bots.
I don't think you or I would get the same leniency if a bot on our network did the same.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. Not legally. Has it been normalized? That's another thing.
Yes, there is legally - even in USA where MPAA & RIAA got widest reach, CFAA is still way more serious law to breach, even at scale
This isn't 1 movie.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s interesting that a lot of U.S. law requires intent. If you just give AI your objective without specifying the means, and the AI violates a bunch of laws requiring intent, but neither the AI nor the person can be prosecuted, this is very convenient.
I don't think this true. If I throw a brick out my window and it hurts someone, I can still be held criminially liable, even if I didn't mean to do it. Do drunk drivers intionally kill people on the road?
Whether intent is required is down to how the law is written. For many offenses “strict liability” applies, where intent is not required, they only have to prove you did it, not what your intent was.
DUI is typically a strict liability crime. They don’t need to prove that you intended to drive drunk, only that you did drive drunk.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not really true. Unauthorized access to a system is a crime regardless if there was damage. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1030
Ah I see you're releasing OpenAI from being the one controlling the tools and giving the agent agency. I'd argue they intentionally accessed systems they weren't meant to as they were the ones running the bots. I don't think you or I would get the same leniency if a bot on our network did the same.
Well yeah, because if you coded a bot, realistically the two options are: 1) bot that crawls random sites/computers 2) bot that crawls random sites/computers, while trying a password list. The former is probably legal, there are whole companies dedicated to doing that, eg. shodan. With the latter, it's pretty obvious you're intending to break into computers, and hard to argue otherwise. Where openai lies on the spectrum between the first case and the second case is up for debate, but it's hard to argue it's anywhere close to the latter. Maybe you'd have a point if openai gave it a prompt like "you're a hacker for anonymous, just do whatever :)".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> No harm, no foul. What? That’s not how criminal law works, at all.
Yes, that's actually how it works: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea