Think of the AIs like employees. If you tell an employee to break the law and they do it, you have both broken the law. If an employee goes rogue and breaks the law in violation of company policy, only the employee broke the law.

The fact of the matter is that they programmed the agents and hooked them up to LLMs they designed, and all of this started with a PROMPT.

I cannot believe for a second that the design of the agent (remember, and agent is just a program that interfaces with an LLM) would do these things if it were not programmed to do so, given particular prompts. I suspect if we were able to see the prompts, the agent tools, the agent instructions, etc. these hacks would not seem rogue at all.

Right now OpenAI is trying to argue that they did not kill someone, the gun they designed and built killed someone and it aimed and pulled the trigger by itself. They want to convince us that the gun had AGENCY, because otherwise actual people are liable for these crimes. Crimes that if you or I committed, we would go to prison for.

These truly are uncharted territories so any overconfident claims about the legal status of LLM-generated anything should be viewed skeptically. Rarely is existing law well equipped to deal with new innovations, so it is doubtful that we will have any answers until new laws are written.

My bet would be that the tech oligarchs will write those laws, so they will probably seem contradictory in that they allow tech oligarchs to do whatever they want with data while placing onerous restrictions on end users.

City Council member of a non-listed Twin Cities suburb I know:

FBI is involved. Most water systems use one of two control/alert systems that are old and make them easy targets.

All they did was shut down components of the systems e.g., wells/sewer lift stations. Most cities were able to cycle manually to get back up and running. There was not messages warning or ransom of which I am aware.

They could have done a lot more damage if they wanted to, rather than just shutting things down.

I live in Plymouth; there was no city communications about this nor did I see any issues. So, I assume there were no physical disruptions to service.

You give these morons way too much credit. While you correctly detailed the effects of the tariffs, none of it was planned. They all just latched on to the idea of tariffs for different reasons (Navarro because he actually believes it is sound economic policy, Trump because the power excites him) but these idiots had no foresight into what would actually happen.

Never mistake something working out for the Trump administration as competence. If these idiots were competent, things would be much worse.

I think the hack really happened. I do not think it was some rogue AI. I do expect that the next time OpenAI gets caught hacking they will have their rogue AI excuse locked and loaded.

If you look at this and the recent case with Apple (or even the case where they unsuccessfully tried to remove Altman) , it is clear that OpenAI views the law as a challenge to work around, not rules to follow. It is very Microsoft of them.

Why do you go with option 3? Option 2 sounds the most plausible to me.

Option 3 sounds like: Well, officer, I was walking behind my wife carrying this bowling ball and we were at the top of the stairs when I tripped over my untied shoelace, which pushed her down the stairs and she was severely injured and would have survived if not for the bowling ball, which I dropped when I tripped and it bounced down the stairs and crushed her head.

I doubt it was set up by both parties, but Hugging Face is clearly bullshitting with the way they are just going along with the OpenAI excuse.

The most simple explanation is usually the right one: OpenAI hacked Hugging Face, trying to cheat on the metrics. They got caught and Hugging Face reported it because they did not realize it was OpenAI. Once they found out it was OpenAI, they could not undo the reporting, and they view OpenAI as too important a partner to initiate a legal complaint against them, so they agreed to go along with whatever spin OpenAI put on this thing.

The really terrifying thing is that OpenAI has demonstrated that, as a company, they do not believe in any legal or ethical limitations to their conduct. They are probably doing much worse things.

That is a horrible answer and I suspect you don't know any more about the law than anyone else here.

The only correct answer to the question is this: "If it isn't illegal, it should be."

Same answer for selling pardons, for spending half the president's time at his own golf resort so he can charge the government to house the secret service there, for accepting lavish gifts from governments and corporations, for trading stocks based on government deals, for making government deals contingent upon business deals with the family, for loaning Pentagon money to the family, for placing spurious tariffs on businesses, for abducting people who have committed no crime and deporting them with no due process, for exporting people to dangerous foreign prisons, for starting wars without Congressional approval, for. . .Jesus fucking Christ do I need to continue?

HOW FUCKING STUPID ARE YOU TO CONTINUE DEFENDING THIS MAN?

Your whole "derp ber derp, It depends blah blah blah" is just an obvious stupid troll way of continuing to defend this moron who you have been defending on this forum for years. You are not being nuanced, you are not being clever. You fell for a wannabe despot and that was an extremely stupid thing for you to do. Continuing to defend him just makes you it obvious how much of an idiot you really are. What level of corruption is necessary for you to admit that you made a mistake?

Yeah, it was definitely Clinton lying about a relationship that set a precedent that allowed the current administration to undertake daily corruption and turn the government into a sort of mafia state. In the past, when presidents said things like, "I am not a crook!", they were totally telling the truth.

I mean, it was extremely consequential, Clinton's lie. It changed everything and many people suffered because of it. He might as well have lied about another country having weapons of mass destruction so he could start a war that would cost thousands of lives and then use that war to enrich his corporate buddies and donors.

Yeah, that Clinton. Real son of a bitch. All our current problems are rooted in him lying about a relationship.

When you get to a certain level of stupid, the stupidity merely comes in different flavors, not degrees.

I had one breakthrough DMT experience where I saw 'the machine elves' (I just saw what I describe as fast-moving fractals that I 'felt' were beckoning to me); but, we have matching experiences w/the other primary psychedelics: I only had relatively minor on-top visual distortions with even the largest doses of LSD (1500+ mcg) or mushrooms.

That said, everyone is different. I know that some of my friends absolutely lost their fucking minds on a few tabs of LSD and, purportedly, experienced wild hallucinations that I have to trust were real to them but haven't ever experienced myself.

You don't get to define your political ideology, I DO!

Parent has a good point. Crypto is good for things other than money laundering. It is also good for tax evasion and as a form of gambling.

The stated goal of the EU is not what you are describing. Tech sovereignty is not about purity, it is about independence. That does not mean they will cut off all ties with American tech, it just means that for certain core technologies they do not want to be fully dependent on American firms handling their data.