Thread

1. cedws · 1790611744 · focus · HN ↗

   A new chip solves nothing. Nobody wants to hear this but there is no solution for the security risks posed by agents today. You can put it in a sandbox, it doesn't make a difference, for it to be useful it inherently needs wide, unattended access. Put a human in the loop and you just end up bottlenecking it and throwing away any purported productivity gains. Auto mode doesn't matter either, it's trivial to trick and for the agent to break out.

   1. nicce · 1790612835 · focus · HN ↗

      > Put a human in the loop and you just end up bottlenecking it and throwing away any purported productivity gains. Auto mode doesn't matter either, it's trivial to trick and for the agent to break out.

      Productivity gains are still enormous compared to what we used to do before agents. But, I know that people don't want to stop there.

      1. egeozcan · 1790614752 · focus · HN ↗

         Humans can also be tricked by the agents.

         Humans can be tricked by humans too but humans care about their reputation in their communities, and at least fear from punishment.

         1. gus_massa · 1790629573 · focus · HN ↗

            Computer says no has been a problem for decades. The human can blame the computer for the errors following it, but must assume the consecuences if they override the decision.

            1. intended · 1790666285 · focus · HN ↗

               Individual responsibility is meaningless when talking about a system and economy level change.

               Unless something is in the structure that makes individual choice and responsibility a meaningful source of friction and reduced velocity, it has no real impact on how AI is being used.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.