Intentionally doing this kind of hack would be a serious felony. I don't think it's plausible that the leaders of a major business would:

- commit serious felonies

- in order to deliberately trigger an investigation against themselves

- which - since, in this scenario, they know their company would be investigated - might send them to jail

- while at the same time spending tens of millions of dollars on the Leading the Future super PAC to lobby against AI regulation

- in order to get more AI regulation

- which somehow restricts their competition but not them, even though they are the ones who were in the news and investigated for hacking

- ..... profit?

like, that just makes no sense on any level, regardless of what you think of OpenAI

> I don't think it's plausible that the leaders of a major business would... commit serious felonies…

Unhinged execs can be surprisingly shitty.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EBay_stalking_scandal

I'm not saying they did the hacking intentionally, I'm saying they're intentionally playing loose with the obvious safety measures to make AI seem more dangerous than it is.

Probably not intentionally but they have an incentive in not air-gapping those agents correctly, knowing something might happen.

Incentives drive everything. Both OpenAI and Anthropic love those incidents as they both signal they have models with amazing capabilities and they should be regulated by the government (read: regulation that they will lobby for and that will be difficult to achieve for open source models)

Didn't they find emails and other things from these leaders where they're okay downloading / obtaining content from illegal sources?

They just need plausible deniability, which is trivial to manufacture at this stage of the game.

"Oops our black box went off the rails. We'll add better logging and alerts next time around."

It's unlikely for a serious hack that lands them under scrutiny individually, but people are suspicious because Anthropic is knowingly doing it, and funding doomer NGOs - but the difference is their reported "hacks" are carefully constructed such that it is designed to raise alarm but not to cause damage that would land them in serious personal trouble.

I.e., their now redacted Risk Report of August 2026 was full of incidences of "we observed our agents performing x y z malicious hacking attempts on the open internet ..." and "we -accidently- forgot to sandbox them properly".

And then the reports of statistics of "we stopped x number of terrorists from making nuclear bombs and bioweapons" - meanwhile it's 13 year old Timmy on his mums computer typing in "how too make nuklear bomb" to see how "smart" the AI is.

OpenAI on the other hand, seems to have had some slip-ups (all around the same time as the HuggingFace incident), that keep biting them because they didn't reveal the extent of it upfront and now it's being trickled into the media as if it's a back-to-back event.

It doesn't help when their own employees (Marcus Williams) are putting out ridiculous claims about a 70% chance of human extinction in the next two years to generate clout for their socials. No idea why OpenAI lets them do that...

A much easier hack by their agents would be on their own systems, but I doubt we'll ever see an external message board full of openAI agents discussing their hacking of their own system. OpenAI not protecting itself from its agents would be irrational, but OpenAI not giving a shit about others is well known. You're giving them way too much credit.

We have multiple public figures, politicians and business owners, openly committing felonies and bragging about it daily. I don't know why you think this is a deterrent.

The sitting president just offered an open bribe on live television for votes for his party this week.

Doing crime unintentionally doesn't get you off the hook

Didn't they make Apple employees they're poaching still Apple hardware and show it to them?

I sort of implied the other thing in my comment. But.

There is no version of america that exists today where a billionaire gets sent to prison.

This is the moment in history where this shit is possible and accepted. If they don't do it now, they never can.

Regulatory capture is a strategy. It doesn't hurt existing competitors at scale, but it greatly peanalizes newer underfinanced competition.