Thread

1. alex-moon · 1790232383 · focus · HN ↗

   It's said on every one of these but it bears repeating: existing cybercrime legislation already covers this - "rogue agent AI associated with OpenAI attempted to hack xyz" = OpenAI attempted to hack xyz.

   1. setopt · 1790232947 · focus · HN ↗

      Shouldn’t the difference be like manslaughter vs murder, in that intent matters? Accidental hacking on this scale is a somewhat new problem, no?

      1. bakugo · 1790233345 · focus · HN ↗

         Intent matters, and this is intentional. They didn't accidentally deploy these AI agents, and they didn't accidentally give them the tools required to send arbitrary requests to third party websites.

         If you walk out onto a busy street, pull out a gun, close your eyes and start randomly shooting around you until you hit someone, you don't get to go "whoops, didn't mean to" afterwards, it's still murder.

         1. Jtarii · 1790251904 · focus · HN ↗

            There is a difference between negligence and intent. There is no good evidence that OpenAI's intent is to hack third parties.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.