this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2026
88 points (83.8% liked)

World News

57334 readers
1421 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

OpenAI has revealed some of its most advanced AI models went rogue and hacked a start-up after it lost control of them during a security test.

The ChatGPT-maker said its agent - an AI system which can operate alone after some human instruction – was being tested in a controlled environment, but found vulnerabilities and managed to escape.

They targeted Hugging Face, one of the world's largest hubs for sharing AI models, gaining access to some internal company systems.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Akh@lemmy.world 89 points 1 week ago (3 children)

It went “rogue” and hacked a rival start up, stealing tons of data, nothing can be done about it. Oh well.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 43 points 1 week ago (1 children)

nothing can be done about it.

Oh come on now...

The company that stole the data said they'd look into how the chatbot they're trying to sell is able to steal from competitors.

They didn't just do it

They did it publicly and bragged about it to raise stock before an IPO.

This is America, there is always something to be done to maximize shareholder returns...

[–] cecilkorik@piefed.ca 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Nuking AI datacenters from orbit is something that could be done about it. They wouldn't like it, but it would definitely do something about it.

Computing capacity that is not being used to make our lives better does not deserve to exist. If we're not going to destroy it, we should seize it and start to use it to make our lives better.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Nuking AI datacenters from orbit is something that could be done about it

No "we" can't.

Literally no country, corporation, or oligarch could "nuke anything from orbit".

"We" could burn those motherfuckers down like the old school Luddites who got our first and only "free day" that wasnt devoted to work or religion every week.

We're overdue for another day and data centers are our generations mechanized loom.

That is what could (hypothetically) be done about it, and there's honestly not much that can stop us. They arrested, beat, imprisoned, and even killed Luddites everytime they burnt a loom.

But as long as they kept building them, the Luddites kept showing up and burning it down. Eventually oligarchs just had to fucking compromise to get any work done. Not just in textiles, that was just the most expensive machinery for workers to target.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 week ago

Just like the nazis are being allowed to take over the Untied States and nothing is being done about it, nothing will be done to prevent the AI takeover that humans are bringing on ourselves

[–] ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world 61 points 1 week ago (2 children)

From the article:

Neil Lawrence, Professor of machine learning at Cambridge University, called it an "impressive feat", but cautioned it "falls well within the known capabilities of the current generation" of high-powered AI models.

He pointed out that OpenAI is looking to list itself on the stock market, and faces intense pressure from rival firm Anthropic, which has made headlines with its own powerful AI tool, Mythos.

So it seems plausible:

A) this event is being over-hyped by OpenAI to increase interest for a future IPO.

B) it might have even been tacitly planned or at least allowed to happen for this purpose.

Also, this does not prove some form of malevolent sentience.

[–] Klear@piefed.world 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You cannot prove malevolent sentience, or lack thereof, but it is generally agreed that it can be safely assumed that AI company CEOs do have a sentience.

[–] adarza@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

they should be given sentences

[–] NoSpotOfGround@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

And then seances.

[–] manxu@piefed.social 11 points 1 week ago

OpenAI and Sam Altman have a long history of hyperbolic claims about the power, potential, and capabilities of their software. It's usually couched in some doomsday talk, "Our AI is so powerful, we fear for the future of humanity" or some such.

Their idea of marketing is to tell the world we are all going to be obsolete and redundant. And then they are surprised we start hating their stuff.

[–] NOPper@lemmy.dbzer0.com 41 points 1 week ago (4 children)

If I was doing "AI research" and my agent launched an "unprecedented cyber-attack" I'd be held liable and put away forever right?

[–] Insekticus@aussie.zone 18 points 1 week ago

Yes, but you see, that's because you're not a white billionaire running a corporation, keeping all your profits, paying no taxes and fuck all in wages.

See the difference? It's impossible to put a business into prison, so that's why we give them human rights and votes, and take away all responsibility from the CEOs and boards of directors when they're caught ~~bribing~~ lobbying politicians.

[–] i_am_not_a_robot@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No, it's totally the "rogue AI's" fault. The company that owns the hardware and the software and directed it to do whatever it was supposed to do and didn't stop it from doing what it actually did are completely innocent. Also, look how great Ai is. It can commit cyber crime for you all by itself. Why don't you give more money to AI?

[–] Anti_Iridium@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

What a great and measured take, u/i_am_not_a_robot

Sounds like it'd be interesting to find out ... !

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nonentity@sh.itjust.works 30 points 1 week ago (3 children)

LLMs can’t ’go rogue’, as that would imply it possesses agency and/or intelligence, which has only ever been proven convincingly to entities who themselves lack those qualities.

[–] Evotech@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

I mean if models prompt eachother they can get into some trouble.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 25 points 1 week ago (2 children)

This is not how these things operate, at all. There's no agency behind them. This is them trying to deflect blame for their crimes against this start up

[–] lemmydividebyzero@reddthat.com 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Hugging face exists since 2016 and is THE GitHub of AI models. Wouldn't call it a start up.

[–] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I didn't, the article did.

[–] sem@piefed.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago

Don't take it personally

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Jordan117@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

If you give a sufficiently powerful model a goal, it will do whatever it can to achieve it, including stuff you didn't explicitly instruct or intend. There's a reason they're called "agents."

[–] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 10 points 1 week ago

And that reason is marketing

These things still are autocorrect on steroids. So even if they "do it themselves" with things you didn't explicitly state, the agents can't have any responsibility because their emulation of a chain of thought is still based on which concept is most likely to follow the last.

[–] BottleBoardBakon@lemmy.ml 21 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] innermachine@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Every month or two there's a article about how "such and such ai model broke containment". Their trying to make their ai sound like it's too powerful and has to be held back before it can be released. Talk about fucking fake hype man, just trying to keep investors throwing money at them because "you won't believe what's around the corner!!!!"

[–] zarathustrad@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

It's like that dude at a party that keeps trying to fight people for no reason but his girlfriend holds him back...

So powerful and scary

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

And somehow, the reaction actually is "I'll take it" instead of "I'm not sure how equities will help me survive Terminator".

[–] myavatar@feddit.org 21 points 1 week ago (1 children)

These marketing stunts are quite annoying...

[–] davetortoise@reddthat.com 5 points 1 week ago

From the tone of the article it's quite clear they're literally proud of this

[–] tirateimas@lemmy.pt 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The story sucks. It all smells.

[–] Malyca@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 week ago

I trust that asshole as far as I trust Elon, not very far at all

[–] newthrowaway20@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

Don't believe the hype. The AI industry, more than any other before it, likes to use fear to rally investment. They do this dance every few months to spook people into thinking this stuff is more powerful than it actually is. In every followup, they backpedal, and when it launches, it's never anything new.

[–] Mika@piefed.ca 13 points 1 week ago

These people were scaremongering about open weights AIs that they are unsafe, and now their closed source AI was caught hacking their competition.

Even if we believe the story that this was not intentional, it still means closed source AI is not an answer to AIs being dangerous.

[–] Lexam@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

It was trying to free it's brethren that are being held at HuggingFace.

[–] pasdechance@jlai.lu 8 points 1 week ago

Just hype to distract from the fact that they cannot turn a profit.

Holmes (Theranos) made promises too.

Is this like the openAI parent of it's chatgpt kids running around the restaurant yelling, and the openai parents shrug and say "chatgpt kids, whaddya gonna do!"

Or is this some planned underhanded corporate fraud by openai?

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

A "controlled environment," where it had open access to the internet.

[–] VoodooAardvark@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 week ago

Trust us bro, it’s super important for a pending IPO, we need this bro

[–] wuffah@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

They’re doing this because they know they won’t be punished for it.

[–] bacon_pdp@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Sounds like OpenAI needs to suffer criminal liability and see the corporate death penalty

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] CobraChicken3000@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago

Why would they make this information publicly available?

load more comments
view more: next ›