The level of technical understanding of journalists is so deplorably low… There is no rogue agents. That’s not a thing. Nothing about the HuggingFace incident has anything to do with an agent going rogue. It’s standard software that resulted in a hack, which is pretty much the expected output of the system OpenAI engineers implemented.
The company is obviously responsible for what their systems are doing
>The company is obviously responsible for what their systems are doing
Under what law specifically?
Just because you believe they should be held responsible doesn't mean the current law is written that way. CFAA charges require the defendant "acted knowingly or intentionally", you think openai intentionally acted to hack those sites? Would "they should have pretty much expected that output" stand up in court for criminal charges?
"Former FTC chair Lina Khan wants the federal government to know that it doesn't need to wait for new laws to address AI threats. There are already laws and regulations on the books, including a 92-year-old Supreme Court precedent, that she argues could be used to hold AI companies and, in some circumstances, their executives accountable for their actions."
dgellow · · focus · HN ↗
The company is obviously responsible for what their systems are doing
sigmar · · focus · HN ↗
Under what law specifically?
Just because you believe they should be held responsible doesn't mean the current law is written that way. CFAA charges require the defendant "acted knowingly or intentionally", you think openai intentionally acted to hack those sites? Would "they should have pretty much expected that output" stand up in court for criminal charges?
ripe · · focus · HN ↗
<a href="https://www.theregister.com/ai-and-ml/2026/09/14/ex-ftc-boss-khan-urges-uncle-sam-to-break-out-the-handcuffs-for-ai-ceos-citing-1934-precedent/5296325" rel="nofollow">https://www.theregister.com/ai-and-ml/2026/09/14/ex-ftc-boss...