What, exactly, are the consequences of these companies doing cyberattacks against random people?

One person does it, they get bullied by the government into suicide, a company worth trillions does it and they get government contracts?

▲

andsoitis 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> One person does it, they get bullied by the government into suicide, a company worth trillions does it and

“…during a UK government cybersecurity evaluation.”

▲

gmerc a day ago | parent | next [-]

> As was standard in our cyber testing, we had intentionally permitted internet access, and model-provider cyber classifiers were deliberately disabled - conditions that do not reflect how frontier models are made available to the public.

▲

HackerThemAll a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Yeah, today it's "during a UK government cybersecurity evaluation", tomorrow it's going to be hosted in a barn in remote place anywhere in the world, without any supervision, regulations or safety testing.

	▲	lightbendover a day ago \| parent [-]
		[dead]

▲

soraminazuki a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Understatement of the year. Making publicly funded research accessible to taxpayers is public service, while using the plagiarizing machine to attack open source efforts for the sake of PR is actual criminal behavior by any meaningful sense of the word.

▲

gmerc a day ago | parent | prev [-]