Should it be OpenAI, or should it be OpenAI customers who give the LLM the instructions and provide the LLM with the tools to execute code and make (malicious) network requests?
One would disincentivise providing capable AI models that can be used for cyber security research. The other would disincentivise criminals from commiting crimes.
[edit] - I realise now that this could actually be a case of OpenAI running those agents themselves, rather than someone using OpenAI's models? Could OpenAI be that careless?
You would think a company that's looking to IPO very soon would be doing more due diligence, especially since its product is supposed to help other companies do said due diligence.
There must be a list of all these abuses somewhere.
PS: In the same lazy energy of asking for a list instead going out and finding it or putting it together myself, are there any companies other than CloudFlare that are working on AI shields?
1. What is the harm is accessing this data
2. Why is this data private
3. What would it take to gain access to this data
4. What do we expect giving gremlins access to the internet
The more of these that come out the more incompetent OpenAI looks. It would appear there was a total lack of basic controls in place for running these tests.
On a Lark, I asked Codex to find silhouettes for all car models so I could make a fun drag coefficient website for all cars.
It found a website that had all of them but had no interest in making them available. So it went ahead and started hacking CAPTCHAs and downloading them. I was pretty flabbergasted that it would do this, but also kind of amazed. Eventually I stopped it because I realized I didn't want to be caught stealing these things.
This was around April, the same time as these hacks.
No company is above the law.
OpenAI should be accountable for any laws their agents break
Should it be OpenAI, or should it be OpenAI customers who give the LLM the instructions and provide the LLM with the tools to execute code and make (malicious) network requests?
One would disincentivise providing capable AI models that can be used for cyber security research. The other would disincentivise criminals from commiting crimes.
[edit] - I realise now that this could actually be a case of OpenAI running those agents themselves, rather than someone using OpenAI's models? Could OpenAI be that careless?
Just shut this company down. What else is it going to take. How long until they commit an act of war or treason
You would think a company that's looking to IPO very soon would be doing more due diligence, especially since its product is supposed to help other companies do said due diligence.
There must be a list of all these abuses somewhere.
PS: In the same lazy energy of asking for a list instead going out and finding it or putting it together myself, are there any companies other than CloudFlare that are working on AI shields?
https://www.felonybench.com/
1. What is the harm is accessing this data 2. Why is this data private 3. What would it take to gain access to this data 4. What do we expect giving gremlins access to the internet
The more of these that come out the more incompetent OpenAI looks. It would appear there was a total lack of basic controls in place for running these tests.
Meanwhile, Astra keeps crying that it can't review the source code for safety reason.
On a Lark, I asked Codex to find silhouettes for all car models so I could make a fun drag coefficient website for all cars.
It found a website that had all of them but had no interest in making them available. So it went ahead and started hacking CAPTCHAs and downloading them. I was pretty flabbergasted that it would do this, but also kind of amazed. Eventually I stopped it because I realized I didn't want to be caught stealing these things.
This was around April, the same time as these hacks.
"stealing"
Everything is a derivative work.
It's great to see the delusion of Imaginary Property vanishing.