It can, it is both - PR spindoctoring not letting a good crisis go to waste to shape the regulatory conversation at the time the company needs it the most.

Hacking is a felony and it matters not if you didn’t mean to if the other side were to press charges. Negligence is no excuse. And OpenAI has nowhere to run from the liability, as both operator and manufacturer.

Alibaba did it first ( https://georgzoeller.com/blog/posts/alibaba-s-ai-deciding-to... )

and the fact that this happens again in a frontier lab is inexcusable and makes the case for operator liability and closing the liability sink of “AI did it”

▲

wbl 15 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The CFAA says knowingly. Negligence is by definition an excuse for that.

▲

gmerc 14 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Removing the guardrails is knowingly given the risk

▲

kibibu 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I think there's a reasonable case that the agent knew it was breaking into the system, for some definition of knew.

I think OpenAI would be very reluctant to let this go to a place where the reasoning was part of discovery.

	▲	wbl 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Agents aren't subjects of criminal law. I agree there may be civil liability, I know far less about that.

▲

skeledrew 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Alibaba did it first

Hah, US frontier models 6 months behind China in cyber-security capability.