| ▲ | Xirdus 4 hours ago |
| The big question is was this grossly negligent or just extremely careless. |
|
| ▲ | rglover 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Both. This should result in criminal charges. |
| |
| ▲ | brookst 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Who had criminal intent here? Or are you suggesting a new crime for negligent hacking, which wouldn’t require intent from the perpetrator? | | |
| ▲ | probably_wrong 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | There's no need for a new crime when we already have reckless conduct, namely, "conduct that creates a substantial and unjustifiable risk of harm to others and involves a conscious disregard of, or indifference to, that risk". https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/reckless | |
| ▲ | rglover 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Whoever prompted the agent, whoever supplied the means, whoever knew but didn't say anything. | | |
| ▲ | tacomagick 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Also whoever monitoring these agents, in this case not monitoring. This "Who is responsible" dilemma is so stupid. If I gave the AI tool means to kill a person but I did not tell it directly to use it and it uses it anyway then I am responsible for it. |
| |
| ▲ | roosterIllusi0n 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The CEOs. They have full control and make all the decisions. Charging anyone else would not stop anything. | | | |
| ▲ | esalman 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | ‘It wasn’t us, it was a bug in the software’ used to be the defense for bad code. Then it became the defense for self-driving cars. Now it’s being used for AI cyber attacks. | |
| ▲ | dismalaf 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
|
|
|
| ▲ | dgellow 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Both? I’m not sure what distinction you’re trying to make. It was completely irresponsible and likely a felony |
|
| ▲ | trvz 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Don’t forget outright intentional. |
|
| ▲ | nottorp 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Marketing actually. |
| |
| ▲ | tacomagick 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | AI is dropping out of the spotlight so they are using desperate measures like this. | | |
| ▲ | nottorp 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | No, I remember being threatened by OpenAI and then Anthropic (and now both) since back when ChatGPT was seriously useless. | |
| ▲ | anthonyrstevens 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | >> AI is dropping out of the spotlight spit take |
|
|
|
| ▲ | roosterIllusi0n 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The big question is why are CEOs getting a legal pass when this kind of thing can be prosecuted. That's the problem here. |
| |
|
| ▲ | ljm 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| AI is literally state sponsored so I don't see that happening unless the AI turns against the sponsor. Wait until OpenAI or Anthropic exploit FAANG. |
