Thread

1. 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. pamcake · 1790603501 · focus · HN ↗

         You read right. For example, using Artifactory the way they did (unmonitored live proxy mode) was pure negligence + laziness/incompetence. Especially if they believed even 10% of the "imminent runaway risks" they had already been harping on for months. On top of that, no (or at least entirely insufficient) monitoring and human oversight. Even after they had previously been hit by the same class of "sandbox breach" multiple times, as GP alludes to.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.