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

Dario, Please

pop.rdi.sh

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 277 posts

Re: Dario, Please

#251

Post by sznio »

edot wrote: post #146
ball_of_lint wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know the proverb "If you owe the bank $100, that's your problem. If you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem" Same thing here - If they build it and it does $100 in damages (and we arrest them for it), that's their problem. If they build it and it does $100B in damages, that's everyone's problem. Even if they do get arrested after the fact. Yes we should have charges and damages for everything on…

Why have any laws then? If laws can't prevent something, only punish it after the fact (which I agree is true)? Yet we have laws. People generally follow them because they expect to be caught and punished. If we passed a law that said the CEO of any company that deploys an LLM that commits a crime gets punished as if they personally did the crime (so, basically instant life sentence if it's even a simple crime times…

>I guarantee you the first email the CEO sends to the company is a "pause every LLM project we have - we gotta think about this".

which the government doesnt want since this will stop progress, while other countries will continue to develop LLMs

Re: Dario, Please

#252

Post by tancop »

ozozozd wrote: post #200
myaccountonhn wrote: post #172

I think Anthropic just have no legitimacy to being the stewards of AI. They don't have a good track record. They are a private company without any governence that puts my interests into the equation. I am not US-based, thus I can't democratically influence them. Why should I want some batshit crazy, US-based technocrats deciding what I can and can't do with AI?

Not to mention they are the first case of a code repo leak I ever heard. Reverse engineering, disassembling, cracking - we all heard. I never heard a company leaking the entire codebase of their product. And, when people read the code, they aren’t even impressed.

Code leaks are pretty common in gaming. But they happen when someone hacks servers or pays off employees, not accidentally like Claude Code.

Cheat developers all want server code so they can analyze the cheat detection and sell more reliable hacks. Modders, pirates and preservation activists can skip a lot of complex RE work. Competing game studios might learn some new techniques. Abused workers want revenge. Script kiddies want clout.

It's a notoriously secretive industry with complex products, hostile work environments, lots of media exposure and heavy competition. There are way more incentives for a leak compared to some ordinary web app or business tool.

Claude Code could be another case where someone working at Anthropic decided to expose them. Or they did in on purpose because they wanted to show there is no secret sauce and Claude is really that good, but they were embarrassed to open source it and make themselves look like hypocrites.

Re: Dario, Please

#253

Post by [deleted] »

chinathrow wrote: post #245
plastic041 wrote: post #163

It's really frustrating that Dario acts as if he's not the CEO of one of the world's most advanced AI companies. He can just slow down his own company. Of course he doesn't want that. He wants to slow down other companies, but not his own. Also, regarding the incidents: Neither he nor Sam Altman takes responsibility for those incidents. You can't say, "Wow, someone's agent is gone rogue; let's slow down" when you are…

> Neither he nor Sam Altman takes responsibility for those incidents. He doesn't need to take responsibility - as CEO, he has that implicitly. And we know it.

[deleted]

Re: Dario, Please

#254

Post by trhway »

watwut wrote: post #242
trhway wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it does $100B in damages, that's everyone's problem. we have the 2008 crisis to wit. And the involved supposedly failed math models and lines of responsibilities and other involved financial relationships were much simpler and clearer and of the types well known to the law and regulators, yet... Additionally any urge to regulate AI is attenuated by how much the situation reminds Industrial Revolution - rush into it…

This interpretetion of history ignores the actual historical events.

i'm sure that i'm telling actual historical events and not an interpretation. Feel free to point to the things which you think didn't happen.

Re: Dario, Please

#255

Post by dana-s »

sznio wrote: post #251
edot wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why have any laws then? If laws can't prevent something, only punish it after the fact (which I agree is true)? Yet we have laws. People generally follow them because they expect to be caught and punished. If we passed a law that said the CEO of any company that deploys an LLM that commits a crime gets punished as if they personally did the crime (so, basically instant life sentence if it's even a simple crime times…

>I guarantee you the first email the CEO sends to the company is a "pause every LLM project we have - we gotta think about this". which the government doesnt want since this will stop progress, while other countries will continue to develop LLMs

Yeah, just like how having regulations for mining companies and dams, if one of them fails and destroys the environment? Progress!

Re: Dario, Please

#256

Post by exfalso »

amouat wrote: post #243
tancop wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need a full air gap. Set up a microVM with network access limited to local network and send all package requests through a filtering gateway that only allows normal download endpoints. Or self host a big collection of popular packages if you need extra security.

Isn't that exactly what they did? The bots could only access the jfrog instance, so they hacked jfrog?

No that's not what they did, they exposed jfrog raw. It would have been so extremely simple to gate services they need the llm to access... I mean, jfrog was not written with this kind of threat model in mind, and neither were a lot of other tools

Re: Dario, Please

#257

Post by wonnage »

ogogmad wrote: post #247
gleezard wrote: post #153

This is now an Ed Zitron thread.

https://danluu.com/zitron/ Zitron might be right about there being a bubble, but he goes much further than that when he concludes that therefore it's a scam . So by his logic, because the invention of the Web also resulted in a bubble, the Web is a useless scam. I think Michael Burry (from The Big Short) has a thesis vaguely similar to Zitron's, but with some crucial differences in detail - and Michael Burry is actua…

Dan spent 7k words missing the forest for the trees

People had been calling a housing bubble since 2003. You quite literally need the market to do dumb things over a period of time before the bubble pops. Otherwise it’s not a bubble!

Actually making money on a bubble pop is another story and that does rely on timing. pointing at a history of failed market predictions as a gotcha is about as effective now as it would’ve been in 2003-2007 right up until the bubble popped

Right now it’s painfully obvious that there is a bubble, the circular financing is documented, the hype-driven valuations are real, it’s just a waiting game to see who holds the bag

Re: Dario, Please

#258

Post by rickdeckard »

zahlman wrote: post #178
edot wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why have any laws then? If laws can't prevent something, only punish it after the fact (which I agree is true)? Yet we have laws. People generally follow them because they expect to be caught and punished. If we passed a law that said the CEO of any company that deploys an LLM that commits a crime gets punished as if they personally did the crime (so, basically instant life sentence if it's even a simple crime times…

> Why have any laws then? If laws can't prevent something, only punish it after the fact (which I agree is true)? Yet we have laws. Because there are many important values of "something" where such punishment acts as a deterrent to other would-be criminals; and because society is more stable when people see justice done and that mollifies hoi polloi after the damage occurs. But many AI doom scenarios don't fit that p…

> The first time "something" happens (at least if you buy the argument) would be bad enough for legal punishment not to matter.

One could argue that the "HuggingFace incident" is already "something" which should be investigated and punished very heavily.

It's kinda ridiculous to build a machine that attacks a competitor of yours and the CEO gets to write blog-posts on how fascinating this machine is

Re: Dario, Please

#259

Post by 63stack »

slowerturnip wrote: post #207

This is a pretty difficult read, in no small part because the author’s frustration with the frontier labs has become a bilious, delusional cynicism that leads him to see dog whistling and obfuscation even in cases where Amodei plainly intends for every reader to see his meaning. Anyway, > Dario in as many words, asks for regulation/ban on open weight models. The big labs do want this. I understand why the author and…

I disagree, the article was straightforward and easy to read.

Re: Dario, Please

#260

Post by pandoro »

The US can and has classified inventions and patents deemed "a risk to national security" under the invention secrecy act [0]. A 1971 leak has shown that [1]:

> solar photovoltaic generators were subject to review and possible restriction if the photovoltaics were more than 20% efficient. Energy conversion systems were likewise subject to review and possible restriction if they offered conversion efficiencies “in excess of 70-80%.”

So all this talk about developpping AGI/ASI for the benefit of humanity is moot. If these companies hit their goal, it will immediately be classified and appropriated by the US MIC. The rest of humanity will get the crumbs.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invention_Secrecy_Act

[1]: https://fas.org/publication/invention_secrecy_2010/

Post reply on HN