Thread

AI companies in race to demonstrate their model most threatening to humanity

441 points · 399 comments · ljewalsh

ACCount39 · 1790595494 · focus · HN ↗
Because AI genuinely is an extremely powerful and extremely dangerous technology, and the "best practices" of dealing with that are still being written.
OpenAI, for example, thought their sandboxes were good enough. As their AIs got more and more advanced, they kept proving them wrong - sandbox after sandbox.
And that's today's AI problems. AI capabilities are still improving - if there's a limit to that, we are yet to find it. Coupled with how willing today's AIs are to break the rules and resort to "hack the world" in their problem solving? Very concerning.
1. nicce · 1790597864 · focus · HN ↗
  > OpenAI, for example, thought their sandboxes were good enough. As their AIs got more and more advanced, they kept proving them wrong - sandbox after sandbox.
  What I have been reading, was that their sandboxes were so poor that it was pure negligence. I am still waiting to see if some external and neutral cybersecurity company with high reputation would audit their sandboxes and how they are being used.
  1. noslenwerdna · 1790600492 · focus · HN ↗
    Genuinely curious, where have you been reading that? How would they be able to evaluate whether the sandboxes were reasonable or not?
    nicce · 1790601315 · focus · HN ↗
    Lot's of hints in the Wikipedia page: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenAI%E2%80%93HuggingFace_incident" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenAI%E2%80%93HuggingFace_inc...
    E.g. even the basic thing (block the internet), was not actually properly blocked.
    Some comments: <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2026/07/22/how-an-openais-human-mistake-led-to-the-ai-powered-hack-on-hugging-face/" rel="nofollow">https://techcrunch.com/2026/07/22/how-an-openais-human-mista...

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.