So, there is a regulatory framework for "safe-ai" that shields these companies from liability. This way, they can sell "safe-ai" to enterprises and if shit-hits-the-fan at the enterprise, sorry, this is certified "safe-ai" so, your bad. Shift blame. From an enterprise buyer's perspective they can say, hey, I bought "safe-ai" and so dont fire me when it "rm -rf"s the production database. Still, it beats me why they are painting their product in a negative light, and scaring their own enterprise customers. After this sort of marketing, any enterprise buyer would be scared to go anywhere near it
1. Wanting a regulatory moat around their products as you said
2. Trying to keep the """AGI""" hype alive. Evil robot hackers is a plausible Al consequence of AGI
They want “regulation” but we already have it. Hacking is illegal. Start locking up those responsible for this mess and I assure you they’ll “have a handle on it” quite quickly.
As Mitt Romney once said “corporations are people.”
[1] Hawaii and Louisiana are strange in this regard. Some other states have a version of this but severely cap the amounts.
[2] "foreseeable" here standing in for a broad set of legal standards that roughly map to negligence/gross negligence/recklessness on the part of the parent
Look at all the podcasts, think pieces, news segments (like this article) that have been generated. Endless hand wringing by pundits, pearl clutching by opinion thinkers, ultimately with focus on OpenAI and how powerful their models are.
All right in the middle of corporate budget season when every C-Suite is looking a a spreadsheet saying “remind me why we’re sending money to these guys again?”
What a detestable institution.
It's been largely harmless thus far and I am fairly sure that OpenAI, etc, have been writing checks to resolve it.
It's also pretty wild that these "AGI" super intelligent systems are too stupid to realize they're potentially causing legal problems. Almost like they're still just fancy auto-complete and not intelligent at all.
These AI companies are just skirting basic cybersecurity stewardship.
Stop calling it AI running amok and start labeling what it should properly be called - Gross mismanagement of cybersecurity.
This is one of the many ways the AI industry dies.
Is OpenAI worse at airgap/etc than Anthropic/etc or are its models worse at this rogue behavior?
Do we have special benchmarks for agentic systems going rogue in this manner? Sure it's OpenAI atm.. but it could be my grandmas PC next week. Concerning honestly.
there's probably better/more likely to succeed avenues to pursue rather than the cfaa
that's not intent, though. that would be negligence.
https://www.brandonjbroderick.com/new-york/dog-leash-laws-ne...
If it happens 50 times and they keep doing shocked pikachu face at some point they look like the toddler who tosses their sippy cup on the floor and shouts "oopse!"
yes, they look very silly. but that's not how intent works.
openai is being negligent (willfully so, in my opinion). but i have seen no evidence that they intended to specifically hack huggingface.
I'm totally on board with treating it as gross negligence requiring hundreds of millions or billions of dollars paid in fines and compensation to victims, but don't act like this is more than what it is.
- It's just an Independent Security Researcher.
- So that's it? You will do no action?
- Correct
gooeyblob•55m ago
randiantech•51m ago
shimman•27m ago
Seems only fair that tech workers get to have their life ruined with 2-3 year prison stints since they feel fine destroying society.
Any AG that starts prosecuting these people will easily win any political race they decide to enter. The environment is too good; voters, rightfully I'll add, despise big tech's leaders and workers.