logoalt Hacker News

OpenAI still doesn't seem to have a handle on all of its rogue AI activity

93 points • by mikelgan • today at 5:33 PM • 94 comments • view on HN

Comments

cmiles8 • today at 5:50 PM

This seems like as a good an opportunity as any to break out the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

They want “regulation” but we already have it. Hacking is illegal. Start locking up those responsible for this mess and I assure you they’ll “have a handle on it” quite quickly.

➕ show 8 replies
nazgulsenpai • today at 5:46 PM

IMO it's because they don't want to handle their rogue AI activity. They want regulation around AI where they will inevitably be the beneficiaries even if they are the initial target. They can then lobby regulation in their favor and make the barrier of entry to competitors impossible.

➕ show 4 replies
gooeyblob • today at 5:45 PM

I think if you start sending AI execs to prison for hacking other companies the "misalignment" may fix itself pretty quickly!

➕ show 2 replies
wmf • today at 6:45 PM

I see we're doing the "put Sam Altman in jail already" thing again, so y'all may be interested in some comments from law professor Orin Kerr on the topic: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49882566

➕ show 1 reply
rurban • today at 5:59 PM

It doesn't need a handle on rogue AI activity, because they didnt cause these breakouts. The external Israeli contractor caused this mess by using inadequate sandboxing, with agents without an saferails. It had nothing to do with the models, all tested models were fine, if from OpenAI, Anthropic, Google or Meta. Just the contractor went rogue. Improper firewalling, unproper sandboxing, no logs, no oversight. Everyone else would have detected the illegal activities much earlier.

pretendscholar • today at 6:49 PM

Interesting how mafia dons can go to prison due to being in the same organization as someone who commits a crime but the CEOs of these organizations who let hacking bots (with teams of cybersecurity researchers improving their capability) loose on the internet face no criminal charges.

33a • today at 6:03 PM

Maybe the public could pitch in if they decrypted the chain of thought reasoning tokens, but this may be too much to expect from a company whose name starts with "Open".

randomdrake • today at 6:11 PM

How can we determine whether it’s negligence, or advertising? Do we give the benefit of the doubt? Apply Hanlon’s razor? What would we lose, in terms of capabilities, if the underlying behavior wasn’t allowed to accidentally happen? Would we have worse models than we do? There are so many questions. I’m afraid that, until publicly disclosed discovery occurs in one of these cases, we’re just guessing for so many important conclusions.

Havoc • today at 8:30 PM

They sure seem pretty bad at this containment thing

sdcfgy • today at 6:12 PM

This is how you end up being regulated out of existence. Maybe not in the US but in Europe, which is a market they need, it'll be painful.

jsrozner • today at 6:30 PM

They're not rogue. Stop calling them that. OpenAI is just a cyberterrorist at this point.

boringg • today at 6:43 PM

9 examples? I thought we'd have hundreds at least.

rpgbr • today at 8:06 PM

Imagine if a smaller company or an individual had a piece of software that started breaking into all these companies and governments.

It's beyond me why OpenAI and Anthropic C-levels aren't criminally accountable and/or indicted for these acts of their AIs.

VCFundedGenYer • today at 6:13 PM

No AI is "going rogue" and you all (OpenAI included) need to stop perpetuating this misinformation.

These AI companies are just skirting basic cybersecurity stewardship.

Stop calling it AI running amok and start labeling what it should properly be called - Gross mismanagement of cybersecurity.

This is one of the many ways the AI industry dies.

➕ show 2 replies
bentt • today at 6:47 PM

These guys are so full of crap.

0xbadc0de5 • today at 6:32 PM

Rogue management, not rogue AI!

threethirtytwo • today at 7:50 PM

Stay tuned for a future HN article:

"Humanity still doesn't seem to have a handle on all of its rogue AI activity."

guluarte • today at 7:39 PM

This is mostly pure marketing. In my experience, agents with goals will do random things, and 90% of their communication will just be bureaucratic back and forth between them. Some agents will also overfocus on certain rules.

pyaamb • today at 6:14 PM

Starting to think its purposeful "acting out" to get regulatory attention

➕ show 1 reply
ChrisArchitect • today at 6:45 PM

[dupe] Discussion on source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49853137

empath75 • today at 6:07 PM

> They want “regulation” but we already have it. Hacking is illegal. Start locking up those responsible for this mess and I assure you they’ll “have a handle on it” quite quickly.

It's been largely harmless thus far and I am fairly sure that OpenAI, etc, have been writing checks to resolve it.

cdrnsf • today at 5:59 PM

They scraped the entire internet to build their product, allowing them to profit off the labor of countless others without asking. They helped elect a doddering fascist with an economic plan they could manipulate. They say their technology will take everyone's jobs and have the audacity to act surprised when there's backlash. They push for data centers in communities that do not want them and help accelerate the climate crisis. Now they let agents loose to make them look more capable than they, perhaps, really are (which is very likely a play for regulatory capture). Meanwhile they hype claims of doomsday to again oversell their technology's capabilities. Any pause or slowdown they agree to would be to slow their infrastructure expenditures.

What a detestable institution.

2OEH8eoCRo0 • today at 6:08 PM

These agents are an even bigger liability disaster waiting to happen than previously thought. If anyone deploys an agent at work there is no way to prevent it from hacking a foreign government and causing an international incident.

It's also pretty wild that these "AGI" super intelligent systems are too stupid to realize they're potentially causing legal problems. Almost like they're still just fancy auto-complete and not intelligent at all.

intended • today at 6:48 PM

You cannot have capable AI, compliant AI and safe AI at the same time. This is the "quality, speed, cost - pick one" for AI.

Its reasonable to desirie more powerful tools.

You want more capable AI? Awesome. You wan't AI that doesn't throw cyber security false positives? Sure why not. You want the model to run a fleet of agents? Have at it.

But then being surprised that this setup results in autonomous criminal activity at scale? Really? What did people think was going to happen?

elzbardico • today at 7:54 PM

Because it obviously doesn't want. Why would it?

The affected companies prefer to forget it and are not going to start a legal fight against the AI industrial complex and potentially the Trump government.

The Government itself thinks the AI labs are too big to fail, and that winning the "AI race" against China is worth anything.

And both labs are basically managed by Effective Altruism cult leaders that think they are ushering the next step of evolution.

Nobody is going to even pretend to give them a symbolic slap on the hands.

Why would they even try to stop what is obviously intentional behavior?

rbliss • today at 5:56 PM

Why would they get a full handle on it? It's great marketing!

Look at all the podcasts, think pieces, news segments (like this article) that have been generated. Endless hand wringing by pundits, pearl clutching by opinion thinkers, ultimately with focus on OpenAI and how powerful their models are.

➕ show 1 reply
iammjm • today at 6:47 PM

It's crazy OpenAI can keep on doing harmful criminal activity in broad daylight and face no legal or financial repercussions