The juridical process is not caught up with this technology yet.

You have OpenAI, launching a process, which is handled through an external RL-environment company which then launches a subprocess that ends up hacking somewhere. If there are consequences at any point for this, you can input another shell company, and then another third party, etc, until it's impossible to assign responsibility

▲

ValueTheory 2 hours ago | parent [-]

This is just adding more crimes to the indictment. Start prosecuting companies for the things the systems they run are doing and the problem gets solved quickly.

	▲	augment_me 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		But the companies are not running the systems, someone else is, it's the whole point of the subcontractors and shell companies. My uni got hacked, but the data is conveniently handled by a third party with 3 employees who just declared bankruptcy, and no one had to pay anything, and there was a new 3 employee cloud form popping up who could be the new vendor. The software world is run this way
	▲	anonyfox an hour ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		theyre not. this just funnels money into "insurance" constructs that makes everything more expensive for everyone.
	▲	SpicyLemonZest an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		If the result is that nobody runs security testing on AI models for fear of being prosecuted, have we really solved the problem?