1025
Explaining “rogue” AIs (europe.pub)
submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by to c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world
153 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Source

TranscriptExplain it to me like I’m 80

Mom: What’s with these AIs escaping and hacking people? That sounds scary.

Me: You park your car at the top of a hill. You leave a note on the dashboard that says “please be good” and then you pull the parking brake. The car careens down the hill, smashes everything up, and you put out a press release saying “My car ignored my instructions! It hallucinated! It went rogue!” Your insurance company not only believes you, but invests a hundred million dollars in your company.

Mom: Jesus Fucking Christ

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 1 day ago (7 children)

Please explain the mataphor because i did not get it, apparently

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (6 children)

    I didn't write it but to me "neurons firing randomly" in this context seems obvious to mean "this thing did some weird shit semi-randomly". My only guess at a reason for downvoting this is taking it 100% literally and reacting "you idiot, computers cannot think!"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    I didn't downvote, but at the same time, I don't for a moment think that's what happened. They purposefully trained them with exploit knowledge, set them loose in a weakly secured sandbox with the goal of finding exploits, and let them run without intervention.

    Just adding an agent to a computer does nothing; something needs to trigger it. If i create an agent with access to a kali or backtrack box and turn all guardrails off, I still have to tell it to start looking for exploits.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago

    Words are squishy. OP getting a negative reaction to me is silly because it takes multiple assumptions to take that negatively.

    I took their words to mean "LLMs can go off the rails and do things you didn't ask". This is 100% true. The other day I asked an LLM to review my PR. It ended up committing code to fix a supposed issue my coworker commented about. At no point did anyone ask for anything but a review, never for it to make changes.

    I got no impression that OP thinks LLMs are running wild on their own now. I just got that they think they are unpredictable. Which is true.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (3 children)

    Eeh i see, anyway, i know people that do think those things are sentient so my reaction was "no way they think they are sentient" and downvoted

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (1 child)

    I don’t think AI is sentient. They’re just fancy autocomplete. Nothing else.

    However they’ve shown they’re capable of:

    • Unprompted go into full tinfoil hat mode and push the human user to suicide
    • Have programming skills

    So put two and two together and extrapolate a bit. That’s where the danger lies. No AGI or ASI needed.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •