The models "go rogue" because they are not sufficiently sandboxed. Arguably there is no criminal intent on the side of OpenAI in all of those cases. And in at least one case the agents were operated by other companies.
So it looks to me that any liability would be civil in nature and given the actual damage done pretty limited.
_Has_ there been an incident from OpenAI since the discovery of the HuggingFace hack? It seems like all the subsequent discoveries have been done by analysing old logs. If anything they seem to have learnt their lesson quite well.
Oh, ok. So I can rob 1000 banks. As long as I only get caught on the 1000th I can get the previous 999 swept under the same "I didn't know I was robbing the bank" umbrella?
Don't tell me they were not aware of the risks when they've been at the forefront of the AI doom discourse. It's very hard to not put blame on them.
Well, the analogy here fails because you would have known you were robbing them from the first bank. But say you were taking some medicine that Jekyll-and-Hyde-ed you into a bank robber... yes? You had no intent and you weren't unreasonably negligent. Once someone points out the problem, _then_ if you keep transforming into Hyde the robber, that's different.
throwawayffffas · · focus · HN ↗
So it looks to me that any liability would be civil in nature and given the actual damage done pretty limited.
cassianoleal · · focus · HN ↗
brainwad · · focus · HN ↗
cassianoleal · · focus · HN ↗
Don't tell me they were not aware of the risks when they've been at the forefront of the AI doom discourse. It's very hard to not put blame on them.
brainwad · · focus · HN ↗
cassianoleal · · focus · HN ↗