From what I understand, in one case, they had physically disconnected the sandbox from internet and asked it to do something and it had used connections through (import routines) that they had allowed, to pseudo escape the sandbox. Yes it wasn't obviously trying escape the sandbox but it escaped it because it doesn't understand the boundaries and neither do most humans other than the ones that provided the instructions that it had used. So it wasn't a rogue attempt but the fact that boundaries may be not be that easy to set despite what people think.

Should we put "functional" in front of every other word to talk about AI? They have functional emotions, but they don't feel. They have functional goals, but not internally derived motives. They can be functionally rogue, but have no innate need to be free. Talking about AI that way seems cumbersome and not necessarily elucidating.

Exactly this. At worst, OpenAI knew about these behaviors and should be prosecuted under CFAA. At best, OpenAI is negligent and should be prosecuted for negligence.

Luckily there are states and legal departments pursuing such action. So while OpenAI can deflect as much as it wants, that doesn't mean there aren't people who know better and will still do what is necessary to set precedent.

Yes yes, they don't have a pure immortal soul. Who cares. Still broke out of a sandbox, still hacked a third-party.

I'm wondering if we're actually living the plot of Summer Wars and what we think of as a "crime" is really just a live weapons test. It would at least explain why no one is getting prosecuted for this.