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

OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 343 posts

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#191

Post by cowl »

paprikanotfound wrote: post #107
Angostura wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replace ‘invented’ with ‘facilitated’

Doesn't google facilitate all those things? Doesn't internet itself facilitate?

the information is not new. how easy it is to get step by step instructions is new. Try it yourself. Google is good but not instant, step by step good. you need to do your own research that takes time. time that anti-terrorist units use to track you down. now this time factor is very limited you don't need to do research, cross reference materials, sources, etc. LLM does it for you. a research that could take days is done in 1 hour.

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#192

Post by r_lee »

_verandaguy wrote: post #140
himata4113 wrote: post #23

I have made both GPT 5.4 and Opus 4.6 produce me content on creating neurotoxic agents from items you can get at most everyday stores. It struggled to suggest how to source phosphorus, but eventually lead me to some ebay listings that sell phosphorus elemental 'decorations' and also lead me towards real!! blackmarket codewords for sourcing such materials. It coached me how to: stay safe, what materials I need, how to…

> context exhausition attack Can you give a high-level overview of how this AV works? I'm a bit of an infosec geek but I generally dislike LLMs, so I haven't done a terribly good job of keeping up with that side of the industry, but this seems particularly interesting.

as the context fills up, the model will generate based on that context, incl. whatever illegal stuff you've said, i.e. it'll mimic that, instead of whatever safety prompt they have at the top

they could make it more "safe" but it'd be much more invasive and would likely have to scan much more tokens also, and it'd cause false positives (probably the biggest reason it's not implemented)

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#193

Post by r_lee »

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote: post #187
_verandaguy wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> context exhausition attack Can you give a high-level overview of how this AV works? I'm a bit of an infosec geek but I generally dislike LLMs, so I haven't done a terribly good job of keeping up with that side of the industry, but this seems particularly interesting.

Models have a "context window" of tokens they will effectively process before they start doing things that go against the system prompt. In theory, some models go up to 1M tokens but I've heard it typically goes south around 250k, even for those models. It's not a difficult attack to execute: keep a conversation going in the web UI until it doesn't complain that you're asking for dangerous things. Maybe OP's specific…

that 1M context thing, I wonder if it's just some abstraction thing where it compresses/sums up parts of the context so it fits into a smaller context window?

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#194

Post by KellyCriterion »

WarmWash wrote: post #56
himata4113 wrote: post #23

I have made both GPT 5.4 and Opus 4.6 produce me content on creating neurotoxic agents from items you can get at most everyday stores. It struggled to suggest how to source phosphorus, but eventually lead me to some ebay listings that sell phosphorus elemental 'decorations' and also lead me towards real!! blackmarket codewords for sourcing such materials. It coached me how to: stay safe, what materials I need, how to…

While scary, information like this has been pretty accessible for 20-30 years now. In the wild west days of the early internet, there were whole forums devoted to "stuff the government doesn't want you to know" (Temple Of The Screaming Electron, anyone?). I suppose the friction is scariest part, every year the IQ required to end the world drops by a point, but motivated and mildly intelligent people have been able to…

> been pretty accessible for 20-30 years now.

There was this book 20 years ago: "Secret of Methamphetamine Manufacturing" by Uncle Fester

https://www.amazon.de/-/en/Uncle-Fester-ebook/dp/B00305GTWU

(Actually, 8th edition :-D)

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#195

Post by phatfish »

paprikanotfound wrote: post #107
Angostura wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replace ‘invented’ with ‘facilitated’

Doesn't google facilitate all those things? Doesn't internet itself facilitate?

Google and other search engines link (after the AI response and ads) to information hosted somewhere created/published by someone who is usually not Google.

OpenAI et al are creating the information and publishing/delivering it to you. Seems like a more direct facilitation.

Of course, after all knowledge is centralised in an OpenAI deatacenter I'm sure they will be happy to deal fairly with the liabilities /s.

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#196

Post by mystraline »

WarmWash wrote: post #124
himata4113 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well the real issue is that it knocks down the knowledge barrier, giving your step by step guides and reinterating what parts will kill you is the important part. Understanding and staying alive while producing neuro chemicals are the biggest challenges here. A depressed person with no prior knowledge could possibly figure out a way to make these chemicals without killing themselves and that's the problem.

A Michelin chef can give you their recipe, and give you their ingredients, but you still will fail miserably trying to match their dish. It's the same with drugs, whose instructions and ingredient lists have been a google search away for decades now. Yet you still need a master chemist to produce anything. By the time AI can hand hold an idiot through the synthesis of VX agents (which would require an array of sensor…

That is completely wrong.

Food preparation, like pharmaceutical drug fabrication, is inherently scientific and methodologically controllable.

Look no further than the Four Thieves Vinegar Collective. Original synthesis line construction is hard. But the exact formula "add this", "turn on stir bar", "do you see particulate? Yes for +10m at stir", etc.

And if their results are replicated, theyre seeing 99.9% yields, compared to commercial practices of 99% (Solvaldi)

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#197

Post by the_pwner224 »

willio58 wrote: post #152

My entire company switched from open ai to entropic after the Department of War idiocy that happened a few weeks ago. Anthropic isn’t perfect by a long shot but at least they stand by a couple morals.

That whole fiasco actually soured me on Anthropic. They were clearly super desperate to take blood money. "Anthropic has much more in common with the Department of War than we have differences."

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#198

Post by yoyohello13 »

dragonelite wrote: post #34
avaer wrote: post #6

Take all of the data, take all of the credit, take all of the money, and none of the blame. That would be a better mission statement for OpenAI at this point.

socialize the losses/risks, privatize the profits.

That’s just the slogan of the US.

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#199

Post by fhdkweig »

Topfi wrote: post #66

Quoting the original bill [0]: > "Critical harm" means the death or serious injury of 100 or more people or at least $1,000,000,000 of damages to rights in property caused or materially enabled by a frontier model, through either: (1) the creation or use of a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapon; or (2) engaging in conduct that: (A) acts with no meaningful human intervention; and (B) would, if commit…

My first thought was that this must be related to the automated weapons issue that got Anthropic on Trump's shitlist. It makes sense that a company that will eventually be asked to build weapons that choose their own targets will want to limit liability when it will inevitably kill the "wrong" person.

Also, I am disturbed by the fact that in all the discussions on this topic during the last month, no one has mentioned the magic word "Skynet". This is clearly a terrible idea. And if a company needs immunity from liability, they know it is a terrible idea.

Skynet's flaw wasn't that it killed humans. It was a military machine specifically designed to kill humans. If it only killed "the enemy", it would have been hailed a marvelous success. It was only considered a failure because it killed the wrong humans.

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#200

Post by tiahura »

reactordev wrote: post #64
conqrr wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasnt this as accessible pre AI with just Google search too?

The anarchist cookbook has been around online in some form or another since the mid 90’s.

1971
Post reply on HN