- cross-posted to:
- fuck_ai@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- fuck_ai@lemmy.world
Once you understand that these are chatbots that were designed to complete challenges like this, using tactics like this, you can understand that the chatbots didn’t “go rogue.” They did what they were designed to do, and because OpenAI ran them with inadequate supervision (without a “human in the loop” that checked each iteration through the Python loop to ensure it hadn’t gone off the rails), they trashed a competitor’s servers.
Designing autonomous, malicious software is generally considered irresponsible and dangerous. If you showed up at Defcon and gave a talk about how your autonomous malware did something unexpected and damaged someone else’s computers, the first question from the audience would be “Why are you so shit at making secure sandboxes?” It wouldn’t be “How are you so awesome at making hacking tools?”
The fact that OpenAI is making it much easier for unskilled people to break into and damage servers is indeed very bad news, but it’s not new bad news. Irresponsible parties have been doing this for years, most notably the NSA…
…
Riley had a very good way of summarizing this: “LLMs are real, AI is fake.” LLMs – chatbots trained on things like CTF logs that can break into servers – are real. They’re on a continuum with other hacking tools that have been steadily demonstrating the fragility of the modern digital world, albeit without inspiring anyone in power to do anything about it.
“AI” – chatbots that wake up, “set their own goals,” and “spontaneously” start hacking servers – is fake. It doesn’t have “a 10% chance of ending the human race.” The Hugging Face hack isn’t a mysterious, supernatural occurrence. It’s a Python loop and a chatbot. The people responsible didn’t accidentally create god: they created autonomous malicious software and then failed to closely monitor it, resulting in it doing something both foreseeable and bad.
It’s fine to worry about this new suite of tools that give even stupider people the ability to trash even more computers. You should worry about that – and demand better security practices from firms and governments, including a blanket prohibition on NOBUS-style vulnerability hoarding. That’s a productive kind of worrying, with a chance of addressing your area of concern. It’s infinitely more reasonable than locking yourself in the toilet with a flashlight and saying “Ayyyyy Eyyyyyye” into the mirror until you wet yourself.


Rewatch Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, from 1971 (55 years ago) - in it, they have a Siemens System 4004 computer fictionally conversing with a golden ticket seeker… that was the concept of AI 55 years ago: something a “computer expert” could translate for investors.
Today, AI “speaks for itself” and even does a reasonable job of voice recognition and transcription, in hundreds of languages. But still, that’s not good enough. It still can’t tell you where the remaining golden tickets are.
Humanity has been embarassingly quick to blame “the computer” for all manner of problems ever since there have been computers. Many people were suckered by Eliza in the 1960s, current LLMs are many orders of magnitude more complex than Eliza…
Even if it did, it did that self-directed, which is one of the LLM agents’ superpowers: the ability to hammer with brute force attacks quickly and cheaply. There are legitimate applications for this, essentially it’s what Folding At Home and similar projects have been pursuing for many years now.