Most laws, if not all, for new technologies such as the internet and AI already exist.

For example: thievery, extortion, murder, etc. are already well-established crimes.

Putting "cyber" or "AI" in front of them makes it the same crime.

I'm really interested in what is actually new about these rules.

solidasparagus 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I'm not a lawyer but my understanding is that OpenAI didn't obviously break a cyber law because it requires intent which doesn't exist (with the definition of intent in a case like this being an open grey area). I think rules around making organizations obviously legally responsible for the cyber attacks performed by agents under their control would be good.

	▲	AnodicElegy 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		In many areas of criminal law, willful ignorance is not an excuse. One could potentially argue that the sandbox setup at OpenAI that led to the hacking incident at Hugging Face could fall into this category. Beyond that, there's always tort law, which doesn't require intent.

▲

sublinear 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I agree, but cybermurder sounds really interesting as a genre of music or something.

▲

tmvphil 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

"Why bother regulating the production of uranium isotopes, killing people with nuclear weapons is already a crime"