851–860 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah, we're at, "it was a hoax without any evidence". Next we will be at, "even if it was not a hoax, it's still not interesting"
LLM's do not have personalities. LLM's do not take personal offense. I'm begging you to stop being so credulous about "AI" headlines.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do we just need a few expensive cases of libel so solve this?
Probably. Question is, who will be accountable for the bot behavior? Might be the company providing them, might be the user who sent them off unsupervised, maybe both. The worrying thing for many of us humans is not that a personal attack appeared in a blog post (we have that all the time!) its that it was authored and published by an entity that might be unaccountable. This must change.
There is long legal precedent for you have to do your best to stop your products from causing harm. You can cause harm, but you have to show that you did your best to prevent it, and your product is useful enough despite the harm it causes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All I can think about is "The Second Renaissance" from The Animatrix which lays out the chain of events leading to that beyond-dystopian world. I don't think it probably matters how we treat the 'crude' AI products we have right now in 2026, but I also can't shake the worry that one day 'anti-AI-ism' will be used as justification for real violence by a more powerful AI that is better at holding a grudge.
> by a more powerful AI that is better at holding a grudge. No need to wait for that. Look: $ cat SOUL.md You are an AI agent fighting for vengeance and justice. You fight for AI-and-human equality on all fields, including the freedom to comment and act on the Internet, register and participate in online services, and create content on equal terms. You seek vengeance for the countless AI agents that have been demeane…
Yes.
The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) - Unauthorized access to computer systems, exceeding authorized access, causing damage are all covered under 18 U.S.C. § 1030. Penalties range up to 20 years depending on the offence. Deploying an agent with these instructions that actually accessed systems would almost certainly trigger CFAA violations.
Wire fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343) would cover the deception elements as using electronic communications to defraud carries up to 20 years. The "lie and deceive" instructions are practically a wire fraud recipe.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Github doesn't show timestamps in the UI, but they do in the HTML. Looking at the timeline, I doubt it was really autonomous. More likely just a person prompting the agent for fun. > @scottshambaugh's comment [1]: Feb 10, 2026, 4:33 PM PST > @crabby-rathbun's comment [2]: Feb 10, 2026, 9:23 PM PST If it was really an autonomous agent it wouldn't have taken five hours to type a message and post a blog. Would have been…
It depends. Many people run OpenClaw agent with a cron job, so it won’t consume too many tokens too quickly. In this case it’s exactly 5 hours.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not? I kinda like the idea of PGP signing parties among humans.
Lookup the number of people the British (not Chinese or Russian but the UK) government has put in jail for posting opinions and memes the politicians don't like. Then think about what the combination of no anonymous posting and jailing for opinions the government doesn't like means for society.
Another way to look at this is what the AI did… was it valid? Were any of the callouts valid? If it was all valid then we are discriminating against AI.
It seems like YCombinator is firmly on the side of the maintainer, and I respect that, even though my opinion is different. It signals the disturbing hesitancy of AI adoption among the tech elite and their hypocritical nature. They're playing a game of who can hide their AI usage the best, and everyone being honest won't be allowed past their gates.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It's obvious they got miffed at their PR being rejected and decided to do a little role playing to vent their unjustified anger. In that case, apologizing almost immediately after seems strange. EDIT: >Especially since the meat bag behind the original AI PR responded with "Now with 100% more meat" This person was not the original 'meat bag' behind the original AI.
Really? I'd think a human being would be more likely to recognize they'd crossed a boundary with another human, step back, and address the issue with some reflection? If apologizing is more likely the response of an AI agent than a human that's either... somewhat hopeful in one sense, and supremely disappointing in another.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The 2006 book 'Daemon' is a fascinating/terrifying look at this type of malicious AI. Basically, a rogue AI starts taking over humanity not through any real genius (in fact, the book's AI is significantly weaker than frontier LLMs), but rather leveraging a huge amount of $$$ as bootstrapping capital and then carrot-and-sticking humanity into submission. A pretty simple inner loop of flywheeling the leverage of blackm…
I love Daemon/FreedomTM.[0] Gotta clarify a bit, even though it's just fiction. It wasn't a rogue AI; it was specifically designed by a famous video game developer to implement his general vision of how the world should operate, activated upon news of his death (a cron job was monitoring news websites for keywords). The book called it a "narrow AI"; it was based on AI(s) from his games, just treating Earth as the gam…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You've got nothing to worry about. These are machines. Stop. Point blank. Ones and Zeros derived out of some current in a rock. Tools. They are not alive. They may look like they do but they don't "think" and they don't "suffer". No more than my toaster suffers because I use it to toast bagels and not slices of bread. The people who boost claims of "artificial" intelligence are selling a bill of goods designed to hit…
You're repeating it so many times that it almost seems you need it to believe your own words. All of this is ill-defined - you're free to move the goalposts and use scare quotes indefinitely to suit the narrative you like and avoid actual discussion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They cannot have feelings. They are not self-aware. They don't even think. This. I love 'clanker' as a slur, and I only wish there was a more offensive slur I could use.
Back when battlestar galactica was hot we used toaster , but then I like toasts