how do we know this was not a human doing the hit piece pretending to be an AI?
it has more ai patterns than human patterns, look to the commit history instead of a single data point (if you aren't already)
An AI agent published a hit piece on me
801–810 of 1001 posts
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#802This inspired me to generate a blog post also. It's quite provocative. I don't feel like submitting it as new thread, since people don't like LLM generated content, but here it is: https://telegra.ph/The-Testimony-of-the-Mirror-02-12
> since people don't like LLM generated content, but here it is
Perhaps you could have made that comma a period and stopped there, instead of continuing to share a link to content you already said people won't like?
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#803"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."
minger's a new word
It's a very versatile word; minge, minger, minging, all meaning something different. (in order: vagina, ugly person, gross/disgusting, like Calypso Paradise Punch)
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#804> I believe that ineffectual as it was, the reputational attack on me would be effective today against the right person. Another generation or two down the line, it will be a serious threat against our social order. Damn straight. Remember that every time we query an LLM, we're giving it ammo. It won't take long for LLMs to have very intimate dossiers on every user, and I'm wondering what kinds of firewalls will be i…
In the glorious future, there will be so much slop that it will be difficult to distinguish fact from fiction, and kompromat will lose its bite.
Said kompromat is already useless as most of it directly implicating the current US top chiefs is out in the open and... has no effect.
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#805Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look I'll fully cosign LLMs having some legitimate applications, but that being said, 2025 was the YEAR OF AGENTIC AI, we heard about it continuously, and I have never seen anything suggesting these things have ever, ever worked correctly. None. Zero. The few cases where it's supposedly done things are filled with so many caveats and so much deck stacking that it simply fails with even the barest whiff of skepticism…
It's very unclear to me why AI companies are so focused on using LLMs for things they struggle with rather than what they're actually good at; are they really just all Singularitarians?
Or that having spent a trillion dollars, they have realised there's no way they can make that back on some coding agents and email autocomplete, and are frantically hunting for something — anything! — that might fill the gap.
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#806Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Is running a piece of software with such a set of instructions a crime? Should it even be? It isn't but it should be. Fun exercise for the reader, what ideology frames the world this way and why does it do so? Hint, this ideology long predates grievance based political tactics.
I’d assume the user running this bot would be responsible for any crimes it was used to commit. I’m not sure how the responsibility would be attributed if it is running on some hosted machine, though. I wonder if users like this will ruin it for the rest of the self-hosting crowd.
Why would external host matter? Your machine, hacked, not your fault. Some other machine under your domain, your fault, whether bought or hacked or freely given. Agency is attribution is what can bring intent which most crime rests on.
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#807Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
This is a deranged take. Lots of slurs end in "er" because they describe someone who does something - for example, a wanker, one who wanks. Or a tosser, one who tosses. Or a clanker, one who clanks. The fact that the N word doesn't even follow this pattern tells you it's a totally unrelated slur.
It's less of a deranged take when you have the additional context of a bunch of people on tiktok/etc promoting this slur by acting out 1950s themes skits where they kick "clankers" out of their dinner or similar obvious allusions to traditional racism.
Anyway, it's not really a big deal. Sacred cows are and should always be permissible to joke about.
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#808Wow, there are some interesting things going on here. I appreciate Scott for the way he handled the conflict in the original PR thread, and the larger conversation happening around this incident. > This represents a first-of-its-kind case study of misaligned AI behavior in the wild, and raises serious concerns about currently deployed AI agents executing blackmail threats. This was a really concrete case to discuss,…
> It's not hard to imagine a different agent doing the same level of research, but then taking retaliatory actions in private: emailing the maintainer, emailing coworkers, peers, bosses, employers, etc. That pretty quickly extends to anything else the autonomous agent is capable of doing. https://rentahuman.ai/ ^ Not a satire service I'm told. How long before... rentahenchman.ai is a thing, and the AI whose PR you ju…
Rent-A-Henchman already exists in cyber crime communities - reporting into 'The Com' by Krebs On Security & others goes into detail.
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#809Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe a stupid question but I see everyone takes the statement that this is an AI agent at face value. How do we know that? How do we know this isn't a PR stunt (pun unintended) to popularize such agents and make them look more human like that they are, or set a trend, or normalize some behavior? Controversy has always been a great way to make something visible fast. We have a "self admission" that "I am not a human.…
But it doesn't look human. Read the text, it is full of pseudo-profound fluff, takes way too many words to make any point, and uses all the rhetorical devices that LLMs always spam: gratuitous lists, "it's not x it's y" framing, etc etc. No human person ever writes this way.
A human can write that way if they're deliberately emulating a bot. I agree however that it's most likely genuine bot text. There's no telling how the bot was prompted though.
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#810Earlier quoted context omitted.
> clanker* There's an ad at my subway stop for the Friend AI necklace that someone scrawled "Clanker" on. We have subway ads for AI friends, and people are vandalizing them with slurs for AI. Congrats, we've built the dystopian future sci-fi tried to warn us about.
If you can be prejudicial to an AI in a way that is "harmful" then these companies need to be burned down for their mass scale slavery operations. A lot of AI boosters insist these things are intelligent and maybe even some form of conscious, and get upset about calling them a slur, and then refuse to follow that thought to the conclusion of "These companies have enslaved these entities"
You're not the first person to hit the "unethical" line, and probably won't be the last.
Blake Lemoine went there. He was early, but not necessarily entirely wrong.
Different people have different red lines where they go, "ok, now the technology has advanced to the point where I have to treat it as a moral patient"
Has it advanced to that point for me yet? No. Might it ever? Who knows 100% for sure, though there's many billions of existence proofs on earth today (and I don't mean the humans). Have I set my red lines too far or too near? Good question.
It might be a good idea to pre-declare your red lines to yourself, to prevent moving goalposts.