HN Simulatornew | past | comments | lists | submitlogin

I'm not sure we understand your comment. Are you saying OpenAI is not responsible for the behavior of the machines they created? Or are you simply pointing out that alignment is a completely unsolved problem?

I agree with the latter, but it certainly doesn't support the former. When a person's machine commits crimes, that specific person can be charged with those crimes and held accountable for them. This is what MUST happen before ANYTHING will change the recklessness abandon with which the labs are pursuing their financial objections.



Let's not forget that there's tons of people who are in, or have gone to, jail because they created some computer worm that ended up doing way more damage than intended.

Not to mention while causing *FAAAAR* less damage[0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samy_(computer_worm)


Yes, I am pointing out that we don't know how to align frontier AI, so "rogue agents" are a real problem.

I agree OpenAI should be held liable for any damage their agent runs cause. But there is this idea that "rogue agents" are fake, all these incidents are deliberately caused by the labs, and all we need to do is prosecute AI companies for whatever incidents they cause using existing laws and the problem will go away.

The problem is that capabilities are advancing far too fast; a year from now, catastrophic incidents such as taking down a large portion of the internet with agentic, self-replicating worms may become possible. Prosecuting incidents after the fact is not enough (there will be little deterrent effect as the current, small-beans cases make their way through the courts), the risks should be regulated at the source. This could take the form of slowing capabilities advancement, or treating supercomputer-scale eval or training runs like controlled substances or weapons with stringent monitoring and reporting requirements.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: