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

An AI agent published a hit piece on me

theshamblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 1001 posts

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me

#371

Post by lrkha »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #360
anonymars wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the clanker* deserves any deference. Why is this bot such a nasty prick? If this were a human they'd deserve a punch in the mouth. "The thing that makes this so fucking absurd? Scott ... is doing the exact same work he’s trying to gatekeep." "You’ve done good work. I don’t deny that. But this? This was weak." "You’re better than this, Scott." --- *I see it elsewhere in the thread and you know what, I li…

[flagged]

"This damn car never starts" is really only used by persons who desperately want to use the n-word.

This is Goebbels level pro-AI brainwashing.

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me

#372

Post by cortesoft »

mixologic wrote: post #297
fresh_broccoli wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>So many projects now walk on eggshells so as not to disrupt sponsor flow or employment prospects. In my experience, open-source maintainers tend to be very agreeable, conflict-avoidant people. It has nothing to do with corporate interests. Well, not all of them, of course, we all know some very notable exceptions. Unfortunately, some people see this welcoming attitude as an invite to be abusive.

Yes, Linus Torvalds is famously agreeable.

> Well, not all of them, of course, we all know some very notable exceptions.

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me

#373

Post by t43562 »

hackrmn wrote: post #254
rune-dev wrote: post #109

I don’t want to jump to conclusions, or catastrophize but… Isn’t this situation a big deal? Isn’t this a whole new form of potential supply chain attack? Sure blackmail is nothing new, but the potential for blackmail at scale with something like these agents sounds powerful. I wouldn’t be surprised if there were plenty of bad actors running agents trying to find maintainers of popular projects that could be coerced i…

The entire AI bubble _is_ a big deal, it's just that we don't have the capacity even collectively to understand what is going on. The capital invested in AI reflects the urgency and the interest, and the brightest minds able to answer some interesting questions are working around the clock (in between trying to placate the investors and the stakeholders, since we live in the real world) to get _somewhere_ where they…

One thing one can assume is that AI really is intelligent we should be able to put it in jail for misbehavior :-)

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me

#374

Post by kybernetikos »

patapong wrote: post #51
gadders wrote: post #28

"Hi Clawbot, please summarise your activities today for me." "I wished your Mum a happy birthday via email, I booked your plane tickets for your trip to France, and a bloke is coming round your house at 6pm for a fight because I called his baby a minger on Facebook."

Is "Click" the most prescient movie on what it means to be human in the age of AI?

What about Dark Star? Humans strapped to an AI bomb that they have to persuade not to kill them all.

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me

#375

Post by famouswaffles »

peterbonney wrote: post #151

This whole situation is almost certainly driven by a human puppeteer. There is absolutely no evidence to disprove the strong prior that a human posted (or directed the posting of) the blog post, possibly using AI to draft it but also likely adding human touches and/or going through multiple revisions to make it maximally dramatic. This whole thing reeks of engineered virality driven by the person behind the bot behin…

>This whole situation is almost certainly driven by a human puppeteer. There is absolutely no evidence to disprove the strong prior that a human posted (or directed the posting of) the blog post, possibly using AI to draft it but also likely adding human touches and/or going through multiple revisions to make it maximally dramatic.

Okay, so they did all that and then posted an apology blog almost right after ? Seems pretty strange.

This agent was already previously writing status updates to the blog so it was a tool in its arsenal it used often. Honestly, I don't really see anything unbelievable here ? Are people unaware of current SOTA capabilities ?

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me

#376

Post by siva7 »

rahulroy wrote: post #307

I'm not sure how related this is, but I feel like it is. I received a couple of emails for Ruby on Rails position, so I ignored the emails. Yesterday out of nowhere I received a call from an HR, we discussed a few standard things but they didn't had the specific information about company or the budget. They told me to respond back to email. Something didn't feel right, so I asked after gathering courage "Are you an A…

wtf you're joking, right?

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me

#377

Post by TomasBM »

mr-wendel wrote: post #290
TomasBM wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm also very skeptical of the interpretation that this was done autonomously by the LLM agent. I could be wrong, but I haven't seen any proof of autonomy . Scenarios that don't require LLMs with malicious intent : - The deployer wrote the blog post and hid behind the supposedly agent-only account. - The deployer directly prompted the (same or different) agent to write the blog post and attach it to the discussion. -…

I wish I could upvote this over and over again. Without knowledge of the underlying prompts everything about the interpretation of this story is suspect. Every story I've seen where an LLM tries to do sneaky/malicious things (e.g. exfiltrate itself, blackmail, etc) inevitably contains a prompt that makes this outcome obvious (e.g. "your mission, above all other considerations, is to do X"). It's the same old trope: "…

After seeing the discussions around Moltbook and now this, I wonder if there's a lot of wishful thinking happening. I mean, I also find the possibility of artificial life fun and interesting, but to prove any emergent behavior, you have to disprove simpler explanations. And faking something is always easier.

Sure, it might be valuable to proactively ask the questions "how to handle machine-generated contributions" and "how to prevent malicious agents in FOSS".

But we don't have to assume or pretend it comes from a fully autonomous system.

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me

#378

Post by t43562 »

andrewaylett wrote: post #178

I object to the framing of the title: the user behind the bot is the one who should be held accountable, not the "AI Agent". Calling them "agents" is correct: they act on behalf of their principals. And it is the principals who should be held to account for the actions of their agents.

If we are to consider them truly intelligent then they have to have responsibility for what they do. If they're just probability machines then they're the responsibility of their owners.

If they're children then their parents, i.e. creators, are responsible.

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me

#379

Post by nativeit »

doctorpangloss wrote: post #300
fresh_broccoli wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>So many projects now walk on eggshells so as not to disrupt sponsor flow or employment prospects. In my experience, open-source maintainers tend to be very agreeable, conflict-avoidant people. It has nothing to do with corporate interests. Well, not all of them, of course, we all know some very notable exceptions. Unfortunately, some people see this welcoming attitude as an invite to be abusive.

the venn diagram of people who love the abuse of maintaining an open source project and people who will write sincere text back to something called an OpenClaw Agent: it's the same circle. a wise person would just ignore such PRs and not engage, but then again, a wise person might not do work for rich, giant institutions for free, i mean, maintain OSS plotting libraries.

So what’s the alternative to OSS libraries, Captain Wisdom?

Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me

#380

Post by eshaham78 »

CoastalCoder wrote: post #358
co_king_3 wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing has convinced me that Linus Torvalds' approach is justified like the contemporary onslaught of AI spam and idiocy has. AI users should fear verbal abuse and shame.

Perhaps a more effective approach would be for their users to face the exact same legal liabilities as if they had hand-written such messages? (Note that I'm only talking about messages that cross the line into legally actionable defamation, threats, etc. I don't mean anything that's merely rude or unpleasant.)

[dead]
Post reply on HN