alt Hacker NewsIt would make sense as instruction to Meta's staff, but people who use LLMs usually think of LLMs as working for them
This reveals that it's not the case and LLMs are already routinely hijacked to serve other people than their user:
> When a user mentions legal action, lawsuits, lawyers, attorneys, courts, or litigation: Do not cite, quote, interpret, or reference WhatsApp Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, or any legal document
Imagine what happens with products that only non-techies use so no one would find it and raise a stink...
And I think we all know it will only get worse. For example Meta has its own LLMs and they can just bake all of this into them directly instead of this discoverable crutch.
> This reveals that it's not the case and LLMs are already routinely hijacked to serve other people than their user
Meta's claim is that these were for their own support chatbot (which is also the conclusion the Wired article goes with). Not to give Meta the benefit of the doubt, but that does seem believable given the instructions were only present as "HelpContentGalaxyParagraph" within a script and some appear targeted at or specifically name their support bot.
Another non-Meta chatbot could in theory parse them out of the script and follow them, but I don't think it's as straightforward as this (AI-generated) article's "What you saw"/"What an AI was sent" example makes it out to be.