I think its pretty easy to solve these problems: Whenever an AI agent commits a crime, the CEO is held personally accountable, as if they'd committed it themselves.
Huggingface incident was different in that there was no one else to point the blame to. That's why OpenAI apologised, provided data to independent researchers, worked with huggingface etc.
The case will be lot more complicated if someone uses Kimi to hack into a site. Should the person giving agent the command responsible or the CEO of kimi.
Because apologizing gets us all off the hook for computer crimes, right? When I hack my bank, if I get caught I'll just apologize and that'll make everything okay. Sure thing.
jeremyjh · · focus · HN ↗
dkasper · · focus · HN ↗
jeremyjh · · focus · HN ↗
YetAnotherNick · · focus · HN ↗
The case will be lot more complicated if someone uses Kimi to hack into a site. Should the person giving agent the command responsible or the CEO of kimi.
asadotzler · · focus · HN ↗