The existing laws are more than adequate.

I gave an example of why they are not.

Could you explain what your legal strategy would be to overcome the intent requirement of the CFAA? If openAI didn’t intend to hack anything and agents can’t intend to do anything at all, and the CFAA doesn’t permit negligence to stand in for intent, seems to me like the existing law does not cover the situation everyone keeps saying it does.

▲

sscaryterry an hour ago | parent [-]

Requiring intent is very specific to your jurisdiction, many, if not most other jurisdictions do not require intent.

In the UK, any form of unauthorised access may be prosecuted.

	▲	semiquaver 30 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		No, the UK’s equivalent law specifically requires human intent and mens rea: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/18/section/3 (1b.) https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/18/section/1 (1c.) I’m told that the UK is a relatively authoritarian country where citizens have no real rights, so perhaps it can be charged anyway, but the plain language of the statute would seem to bar it.