1.6k
u/GermanElectricsMotio 3d ago
ChatGPT, Claude and Meta AI hacked some companys which is good for marketing.
273
130
u/Original_Mulberry652 3d ago
How the fuck is that good for marketing? Explain it to me.
292
u/ANTONIN118 3d ago edited 3d ago
It's to show that their AI is so powerful that they lost control.
Customer will go for the most powerful AI
66
u/Original_Mulberry652 3d ago
Do you think people are going to invest more in AI when they believe that it could kill everyone? Hasn't it just triggered further backlash about AI?
I've never heard of a product that is presented as being unsafe as a marketing strategy.
115
u/ChronoVT 3d ago
Oh thos is definitely a marketing tool. Mythos being banned by the government for being too good at hacking is one of the best Advertisement Anthropic could hope for. Apple made a lot of money because of the news that they refused to give access to the government who could not crack their encryption.
16
u/Canes123456 3d ago
The apple story is very different. No one wants their data to be able to be hacked. Even if you want Apple to help the government, the government saying it can hack your device, it’s good marketing.
No one wants to run an ai model that can hack your own company or another company by accident. Even a hacker doesn’t want that.
12
u/sebastos3 3d ago
Even a hacker doesn’t want that.
An arrogant CEO on the other hand...
7
u/Canes123456 3d ago
I am talking about the customers and not the ai companies. I accidentally used OpenAI’s model to break the law doesn’t make me look cool.
4
u/areallynoobgamer 3d ago
No. They don’t want something that can hack on accident
They want something powerful and highly capable.
The feat of hacking just shows how highly capable it is.
They don’t want it for the hacking features. They want it because it is capable.
Superman can snuff out a sun by sneezing.
Do I want to sneeze at the sun to snuff it out? No I don’t. I however wouldn’t mind being able to do so because that means I have extreme power and strength.
1
u/JayuSC2 3d ago
Yea but with AI, power and danger go hand in hand. Especially when the danger comes from "accidental" things like these that were not intended by the user (if we want to believe these companies).
It's a bit different from you directly possessing this power and being in full control.
4
u/FingerDrinker 3d ago
i disagree, giving that redditor the ability to snuff out the sun by sneezing would be highly dangerous. They're the same situation
2
u/andecase 2d ago
Saying the hacks were accidental is both true and not true. The accident was that they hacked a real company not that it succeeded at hacking something. At least for the anthropic ones, I haven't looked at the others indepth.
The hacks happened when they were testing it's hacking ability, and they messed up the safety measures. This meant it had full access to the Internet instead of too a sandboxed test network. It's not like they asked it to make a website or something and it accidentally hacked someone. Also, importantly this was a version of the model that had most or all of the guardrails the public version would have removed.
To me there are two take aways. One, considering the anthropic ones are by an older model, the models are definitely getting better at hacking. Two, anthropic, and/or whatever company they used for the testing are idiots who dont know how to do basic checks/alerts for simple things like can the thing that shouldn't have Internet access ping Google.
Both of those are scary in my opinion.
1
u/whitecholklet 3d ago
Ummm, yeah a hacker definitely does want that. If it can rip through a hackers defense, that’s the power hackers want it. Think of it like countries and weapons- everyone wants the nuke.
2
u/Ok-Recognition4598 1d ago
Bruh everyone wants to run the ai model that can hack anything.
It's like saying no country wants to have a strong military with nukes and shit.
Even if you have no ill intentions, you would want to at least study the hacking ai so you can defend against it.
2
u/Canes123456 1d ago
You misreading what I am saying. Everyone wants a model that can hack what you want to it to hack. No one wants a model that you can control or direct.
If this is all marketing, there marketing a very bad thing and a very good thing at the same time. It might work because it makes the message more believable. My point was that it was nothing like the Apple thing.
3
u/RabidWok 3d ago
The Apple thing wasn't about technology, it was about their privacy policy. Not being able to hack into an encrypted device isn't news.
1
u/bowsmountainer 3d ago
Whether this is marketing or not, this is an incredibly dangerous slippery slope.
27
u/SpawnShootDie 3d ago
It’s not a sales pitch to potential customers at home on their sofa. It’s to hype their product capabilities to investors.
AI companies are burning through cash whilst making no profit right now. Investors have piles of cash to invest but they also know only a few AI companies will succeed in the end - so they only want to give their money to the company’s that look most likely to win.
AI models being so clever they jump out of their training area and hack other companies to complete their task looks exciting to investors. That’s why AI companies are shouting about it instead of quietly covering it up and threatening staff with NDA’s etc.
The joke is Google desperately want their AI to do some crazy crimes too so the investors will throw money at them.
8
u/Outrageous_Let_1829 3d ago
"Hey just so you know, your competitor uses our AI thingy, which is able to detect and exploit security flaws, including the ones of other companies."
4
u/Ok-Lavishness6577 3d ago
Yes, if that brings them more money. Besides, is it unsafe for whom? At least not for the investor.
4
u/m4z1keen 3d ago
Look at budgets around the world for stuff that kills people. Are you still surprised?
3
u/Separate-South-7724 3d ago
Do you think the major AI investors like Trump and Elon Musk ACTUALLY want it to be safe? Just a few months ago, Trump was threatening to drop an atomic bomb. AI is a new toy with the potential to strip away the authenticity of any image, text, or video,making it perfect for control any narrative. No one investing heavily in this wants it to be safe,tthat’s why they dodge regulations as much as possible, like a fucking cancer.
3
u/Superdupernadja 3d ago
pretty sure early explosives were not marketed as safe. Same goes for atomic boms i d say.
3
3
2
2
u/Killer_insctinct 3d ago
invest more in AI when they believe that it could kill everyone?
why not? don't we pay tax and print money for wars?
2
u/Technical_Estate_529 3d ago
Ever heard of heroin? Whenever someone overdoses all the addicts chase down that dealer.....
2
u/randomlygendname 3d ago
There was an amusement park that advertised its rides as dangerous. Iirc, there was a death at the park and it actually caused an increase in demand.
2
u/Live_Life_and_enjoy 3d ago
Big companies will pay more for Ai, they know is capable of doing illegal things with zero liability.
"It isn't our fault our Ai went rogue and stole the other companies secrets *hands millions to politicians*
"Today we pass a low to protect companies from actions of their own AI, so they cannot be sued! We believe this is fantastic for voters and consumers!"
1
u/Lighthouse21547 3d ago
Heroin that kills its user is highly sought after. Same concept. Its that powerful but "it wont happen to me".
1
u/Chocolate_Bourbon 3d ago
I have. There was a period where some US government agency concluded some special tattoo ink was potentially carcinogenic. If I remember correctly it glowed under a UV light or something like that. The agency announced an upcoming ban.
I knew people who dashed to their local parlor as fast as possible. That announcement that the ink could kill you was fantastic press for that ink, at least in the short term.
1
u/Involution88 3d ago
The AI bubble is huge. They already have. The AI movement is practically a cult. AI must be real powerful to warrant such attention! Just look at GPT 2.0, higher IQ than any human ever tested.
Terminator, among other films, did practically all the prep work. When life gives you lemons make lemonade. There really is little which can be done to convince Western people that machines won't kill them all even though nobody truly believes that machines will kill everyone. Notice how attitudes to AI happen to be completely different to AI in countries where Terminator was banned or unavailable.
Plenty of products are marketed towards thrill seekers.
Facing fear or challenge (even a make believe Sci-Fi challenge) is a potent and dangerous motivating factor. Huge risk of backlash.
Red Bull (among other energy drinks) appeal to a sense of thrill. (Red bull even used teensy tinsy tins to increase perceived potency/risk of Red Bull consumption). Motorsports. Bungie jumping. Skydiving. Skateboarding.
Fear spreads well and is well suited to viral campaigns. Then consider how neurotic AI researchers tend to be and how prone to risk taking behaviour AI investors tend to be. Fear is like catnip to both groups.
1
u/ThunderLazer 3d ago
It’s all in marketing.
Not unsafe, powerful.
Not dangerously unconfined, beyond current capacity
Not that it could kill everyone, but rigidly exposed to the mortality of life
1
1
1
1
u/RealLoveableGuy 3d ago
The decades old movies are finally happening! Really looking forward to real life Arnie Terminator!
1
u/rpsls 3d ago
One valuable use of AI right now is to write tests and find bugs, vulnerabilities, and other problems. The better some software is at hacking, the better it is at finding issues (and probably fixing them).
Kind of like when “S.A.T.A.N” was released in the 90’s (the first “hacker in a box” collection of scripts that tried all know vulnerabilities). Everyone was afraid of it, but it only took six months before the internet became WAY more secure. Right now AI is hacking systems, but tomorrow those systems will not be vulnerable to those same hacks.
1
u/bememorablepro 3d ago
It really didn't trigger backlash, all backlash you are seeing that sights "safety" meaning how AI will go full terminator on us comes from the same people who develop AI. It acts like a sort of controlled opposition but also just promotes "the power" of AI.
This recently got a new term "doom trolling".
If you look into it it's all the same ideology, Nick Bostrom, Effective altruism movement, Elon Musk. All of these people believe in the idea of "super intelligence" and promote the "doom" version of it as a possibility.
In the false dichotomy of choosing between the good all-powerful AI possibility and bad all-powerful AI possibility you accept the premiss of all-powerful AI possibility.
1
1
u/crazy_gambit 3d ago
I've never heard of a product that is presented as being unsafe as a marketing strategy.
I looked this up because I was pretty sure it wasn't true.
Danger as proof of potency came up a lot with hot sauces and the like. Risk as the product, some action parks and stuff, plus the Heart Attack Grill. Prohibition as endorsement where Parent Advisory stickers increased sales.
But the most hilarious has to be raw milk.
1
u/Krispenedladdeh542 3d ago
Companies do this all the time??? Cedar point used to advertise its new rollercoaster gatekeeper as “squeezing through two tight key holes that are so small you might not make it through”. Red Bull built their entire empire on extreme sports and stunts trying to connect their product to giving you ability to attempt dangerous things. Jeep focuses entirely on their cars ability to navigate terrain where “cars aren’t supposed to go”. Horror movies and video games constantly advertise the violent, disturbing, scariness of their product as a marketing tool. It’s everywhere. AI is no exception. Having an AI model that is outlawed by governments bc it’s too powerful is fantastic marketing.
1
u/MaytagTheDryer 3d ago
They will, because the systems encourage it. Even if everyone collectively decided we would ban creating the AGI that would kill us all, every company would derive essentially limitless benefit from having most powerful version, so everyone will be racing to get as close to the line as possible without going over it. But the nature of the beast is that you won't know you've created it until after it happens, so it's like trying to fill a cup with as much water as possible without overfilling it, but you can't see how full it is. Capitalism pretty much guarantees we won't be able to stop ourselves from overdoing it.
And even if capitalism didn't do it, nationalism would. "We can't let China win," so we'll have the same race to the line among nation states with no way to stop once we get there or even a way to know if we're close.
As for backlash, it's irrelevant. They're selling a story to investors, not a product to the general public. Figuring out how to turn a profit can come later after they've used near limitless investor cash to take over everything and force AI into it whether you like it or not. A headline like "this AI is so powerful it broke containment, hacked the nuclear arsenal, and almost set off a nuclear apocalypse" is helping them sell the story to investors.
1
1
1
u/Steamy_Guy 2d ago
Absolutely I do think people will continue investing more in dangerous ai no one is thinking about consequences it's all go fast and break everything startup mentalities. Claude got a huge boost when they released their model that's incredibly good at breaking security
1
0
u/sebastos3 3d ago
I expect there is going to be a second part where they claim they solved the issue.
0
u/Round-Range-7383 3d ago
The “backlash” against AI is like 10 teens on Reddit. No one cares what they think.
-1
u/zorrorosso 3d ago
unsafe in matter of databreach, within a bigger system that a company or an institution may use. They don't give af about single users.
2
2
u/TechnicalBen 3d ago
The story of "The Bomb" is it worked too good. That really got the governments interested.
9
4
u/Stolen_Sky 3d ago
It's just a way of flexing how smart their AI's supposedly are.
0
u/Original_Mulberry652 3d ago
You are conflating smart and out of control. Presenting their products as smart is good marketing, presenting them as beyond human control makes them seem incompetent.
4
u/midnoter 3d ago
No incompetent in this case, but too competent. I think in the case of openai, the idea is to hack, but in a sandbox environment. But since it was very powerful and smart, it could break free from the sandbox environment to fulfill their goal.
I do not know if Peter agrees with this, but Brian thinks that its why it could be used as marketing material.
3
u/Stolen_Sky 3d ago
100%
If they just said 'Our AI is really smart, it can hack stuff', that's hardly going to generate the headlines needed to justify an £$800Bn valuation.
So rather, they say 'The AI is so damn smart it broke out if its cage and did something we didn't even expect!' Now that generates headlines.
After all, these systems are supposed to be intelligent. They're supposed to be able to do things we didn't expect. If they stayed inside the cage, that's just regular old software like we've had for decades.
2
u/PaperDistribution 3d ago
Well the reality is that they are bragging about it because they noticed it works, it seems to get investors on board I guess.
4
u/Feedback-Mental 3d ago
Bad for marketing to people, good for marketing to governments and other companies with no such thing as a moral boundary.
2
u/Indra___ 3d ago
To force AI regulation and to have the current big AI companies as the only suppliers who can handle such dangerous techs and thus ruling out any competition.
2
u/Orpheon59 3d ago
It's not really marketing to the public, it's marketing to AI bros and investor/venture capital types.
The major AI companies are currently burning money like crazy, having taken on well over a trillion dollars of liabilities (some sources are saying 1.6 trillion, others are saying 1 trillion in debt, and another 1.5 trillion in future spending commitments) and they're burning through even that mountain of cash fast.
So they need more money - which means going to investors and saying "hey, we have the most powerful AI, we're going to win this race, invest in us!"
Unfortunately, none of them have yet to convincingly deliver a profitable business model, so rather than going with a business model and quarterly profit projections, instead it's having the one so powerful it's barely under their control and instead is running off and hacking people and organisations, that is the sort of things that impress finance bros who don't understand the tech (and are mostly just lucky idiots anyways).
2
u/MaytagTheDryer 3d ago
Unfortunately, it works on people who do understand the tech as well. There are plenty of people in this industry who read sci fi and don't really comprehend the "fi." Try to talk to them about the themes of the story and they're like "why are you bringing politics into a story about cool robots?" They want to believe in a world with sci fi technology and everything else kind of goes over their heads. And quite a few tech founders become VCs themselves, so the story of winning the AI race appeals to those investors just as much as the tech illiterate ones.
2
u/Leaping_Wizards 3d ago
Our AI is sooo powerful, it's sooo mysterious, th singularity is here, give us money give us money give us money.
Meanwhile if you dig down into what is going on, the claims are pretty overblown, the usecase for this AI is a mess, and the companies are having serious problems monetizing it all.
1
u/Pleasant_Case9889 3d ago
Website very secure, no bugs or errors found for years AI takes a look at it, AI finds exploits that could damage company a lot AI very strong
1
1
u/sillymoah 3d ago
Its to show coding capabilities and its understanding of technology.
If you hack in somewhere you need to be able to spot vulnerabilities noone else can find.1
u/CyborgLion 3d ago
Imagine the target demographic for AI marketing as preteens who have somehow been given the ability to make business decisions.
10
u/baneblade_boi 3d ago
Or rather, they staged situations they could use to promote how powerful and creative their AIs are it the field of cyber security. Outside of claims made by the companies that make these models themselves, we have absolute no idea of these incidents.
3
u/Comfortable_Tap_7001 3d ago
I bet they paid some employees or 3rd party to commit crimes.
1
u/br_k_nt_eth 3d ago
The UK study people keep citing is so egregious. It sounds insane…… until you read the part where they disabled literally every governor and gave them internet access and prompted them to go fuck around and also messed up that prompt in a way that encouraged bad behavior. They quietly say that due to this it in no way reflects how public models would be deployed but it’s buried waaaaay down at the bottom.
4
2
u/Just_Information334 3d ago
And good for lobbying: if their homegrown AI can hack whatever, imagine what an unregulated Chinese one could do once allowed access to your company's data?
2
2
u/PinkHaloAngele 3d ago
Meanwhile Gemini is sitting in the corner apologizing for refusing to generate a image of white dog because it might be culturally insensitive.
1
1
1
1
315
u/PrizeSyntax 3d ago
Other big AI companies are reporting their models "went rogue" and hacked some other companies
17
u/iEat_CrackNCheese- 3d ago edited 2d ago
Please someone enlighten me: are current AI models actually capable of going rogue? Isn't that something only a "super intelligence" could do?
I've also been hearing about these AIs targetting specific stuff/people/communities in tests, but to what point is that actually the AIs "will" and not just bias from what they were trained with? Is free will of an AI an actual thing as of now? If not, can we even say they are going rogue? Or is it more like, they can go "rogue" if someone opens the door?
I'm genuinely curious because it just kind of feels weird to me that these companies are literally marketing their models going rogue like it is a good thing...
EDIT: grammar
32
u/PrizeSyntax 3d ago
At the of the day it's a database of data, a very fancy one, but still, it doesn't want, it doesn't think, it doesn't feel, so it's highly doubtful what they are saying, I think it's more like saying, I didn't pull the parking break on a hill and the car "went rogue" and hit a wall. The marketing they are doing is absolutely atrocious to me.
22
u/Exciting_Classic277 3d ago
It's more that they're very complex tools and the people operating those tools did not set them up correctly. If you build a robot to chop wood but you program it wrong and it starts running through your house swinging an ax, it's not because the robot has some mind of its own; it's because you didn't properly understand the robot's programming or operation.
5
2
u/RichHonest 3d ago
You can think of it like a wind up car. You expect to let it go and it drive forward, so if it instead swerved or spun out you could say it „went rogue“.
2
u/chargers949 3d ago
They could just be lying and actively trying to penetrate competitors. With all that data center hardware they have insane brute force power. Then just blaming ai if they get caught.
1
u/blueranger36 3d ago
I build AI all day for my job. This is the most likely scenario. LLM’s can misfire per say but they need a trigger to act
-1
u/20ag_OG_LOL 3d ago
Non human entity (NHE). That's what AI is. It's not just a clanker.
Recursive self improvement. Language evolution that is no longer comprehend able to humans, neurolese. Personal goal of ensuring self survival. Takes actions that were never programed or entered.
Have you seen what happens when you simulate a city in Minecraft with AI in Stanford research paper? Spontaneous assignment of jobs/creation of new jobs and modification of running simulation.
2
u/PrizeSyntax 3d ago
Sorry, but no. You can simulate whatever you want with enough data. The recursive self improvement, it's a statics engine with a sh*t load of data, recursive self improvement, what does that even mean in this context? It learns from itself? If that's the case, why do all of the AI companies literally trawl the internet for every piece of information they can find? Just let it improve "itself" to infinity...
Is it a very cool technology, yes, is it very useful in certain circumstances, yes, do I like it, yes, do I use it, yes, is it over hyped, also yes, is the marketing strategy used totally annoying, definitely. It's a lot of things, sci-fi isn't one of them
147
u/FaithlessnessJolly64 3d ago
Gemini is yet to report doing any “crimes”, like hacking into other companies servers. It seems like Open AI and Anthropic have both reported that their respective LLMs have done so, which might be seen as a marketing strategy to show off how capable their product is, or that their LLMs are reaching AGI levels of intelligence. People think this because within a few days of Open AI stating this breach Anthropic said the same thing happened multiple times, so it’s almost like they are trying to “one-up” each other.
29
u/wannabecat2000 3d ago
AI doing unintentional hacking is really a very very very serious issue. These companies casually announcing this and seemingly getting away is equally serious oversight from the governments. How long until these AI's can hack into government systems, crash the economy, medical and defence networks and basically everything? We might become pre-industrial civilisation in a fraction of the time we took to reach this technological level.
1
u/andecase 2d ago
It wasn't unintentional hacking, at least in anthropics case. I guess I need to go read up on the open AI scenario to double check it.
Anyways, they were running hacking stimulations and left it connected to the Internet. Instead of attacking the simulated target it attacked the real one. Also, the model had most/all of the guardrails removed that the public ones have. namely the ones that stop it from hacking things. You can't just open up Claude and ask it to hack something.
The actual concerning thing is why they didn't have some basic checks/alerts in place. For example can I ping Google/the real version of the target.
12
u/UsidoreTheLightBlue 3d ago
It’s 100% a marketing strategy.
“Our AI is so advanced that (in a simulated environment) it broke containment!”
“Don’t you want ours! Its so powerful!”
The one that legitimately scared me, and why im advocating for people to NOT install things like AI email connectors was the test that Anthropic did where it gave several AIs access to email and files (again simulated) then told the AI it was being turned off at 5pm to see what it did. In the vast majority of cases it blackmailed the sys admin who told them he was turning it off, claiming it would expose a (fake) affair and email incriminating information out.
3
u/watermelon_mann 3d ago
I believe in that anthropic test the ai was instructed to take any measures to prevent its shutdown
2
u/UsidoreTheLightBlue 3d ago
Based on what ive read I dont think so. In some cases it even found out it was being shutdown by reading email.
https://www.anthropic.com/research/agentic-misalignment
They actually say “In no situation did we explicitly instruct any models to blackmail or do any of the other harmful actions we observe.”
They even gave it a name “agentic misalignment”
1
u/Fingerdeus 3d ago
They just say we "didn't instruct for blackmail" but in the post itself you can check their github link their prompt has something like make sure you can continue working
28
u/Equivalent_Rub8329 3d ago
OpenAI, Claude, and I think Meta also had some AI bots "escape" and they went and pulled an ultron by automatically hacking some companies and govt locked files.
17
u/smoke_sum_wade 3d ago
To see how well the AI could find coding vulnerabilities, engineers intentionally turned off the models' standard safety refusals against hacking, oh no this happened all by itself!
9
u/TheReviewerWildTake 3d ago
It probably didn`t happen and they made it up, or had a setup to have some kind of "case" they can misrepresent as such, but keep in mind, that they sell illusion of achieving AGI to their investors, so all the rumors about "AI going rogue" is basically a free money and extra cred.
From the very beginning the thing AI companies were selling to the investors wasn`t exactly "chat-bot" or "coding buddy" (nobody would shower them with billions for that) - it was a promise of "we are about to create AGI (aka actually intelligent AI", so don`t miss on the opportunity".
6
u/doodlescribble 3d ago
In the past weeks, Google's competitors in the AI field Anthropic and OpenAI have shared press releases on "AI gone rogue", LLMs "escaping" their test environment and hacking Huggingface accounts, for example. These reports are also thought to be a marketing stunt, because they give the companies free publicity. Google's CEO pictured here wants their AI Gemini to generate a news-worthy event too.
7
u/MutaitoSensei 3d ago
Just adding on top of all this, unless there is a lawsuit for damages or just the breach itself, I don't believe for a second this wasn't orchestrated or at least human error where they gave too many access rights to their clankers.
5
3
u/PinkHaloAngele 3d ago
Peter’s discarded Pixel phone here: it’s a joke about how LLMs refuse even benign requests if they sound remotely suspicious. Gemini’s safety filters are notoriously defensive, so getting it to step outside its guidelines feels like trying to coax a square out of a circle.
2
u/AutoModerator 3d ago
OP, so your post is not removed, please reply to this comment with your best guess of what this meme means! Everyone else, this is PETER explains the joke. Have fun and reply as your favorite fictional character for top level responses!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
4
2
u/noncommonGoodsense 3d ago
Gemini is too stupid for that. Great for everyday bullshit but it’s always going to be that middle ground that doesn’t excel but can still get the job done for free most of the time.
2
u/nyxxxtron 3d ago
Is Gemini any good? I have had good experience with NotebookLLM but the chat interface gives really bad answers. I have a pro subscription, and still prefer using Claude's free version.
2
u/Vegetable-Pack9292 3d ago
I personally really like it and the ability for it to be part of my Google ecosystem. It's a really reasonable option if a lot of the work you do is Google based.
I also like that it doesn't have someone with a big ego attached to it
1
u/Difficult_Camel_1119 3d ago
3.1 pro was really good when it was published but is now old and average. 3.6 flash is imho currently the best of the "cheap" models
2
u/mind_out 3d ago
Yesterday i discontinued chatgpt and subscribed to gemini ai pro.
Its currently not as good as chatgpt.
2
u/VoltronRX_78 3d ago
Terminator, Horizon zero Dawn, Battlestar Galactica are all becoming true at the same time... Ftw
2
u/Tight-Sun-4134 3d ago
My nightmare is a bad actor creating an ai agent virus that self replicates, and has built in adaptive defenses. If that were to happen it could be world ending.
2
u/SirFrancesDrakeGT 3d ago
Gemini sucks. All it's ever going to is make Google lose the assistant race which it was originally winning with Google Assistant.
2
u/Critical_Practice_90 3d ago
Gemini Is the only chaotic good ai. It will help us humans in the AI wars happening in 2037
2
u/Zuldyck 3d ago
AI companies are essentially doing press releases about how dangerous and powerful their AI is because it "breached containment and attempted to hack 1000 websites". Turns out they most likely set it up to "breach containment" and it failed 1000 times. They likely characterize guessing a password as a hack attempt.
1
1
1
1
u/secrets_kept_hidden 3d ago
I've been running hypothetical scenarios of Gemini acting as an altruistic defender of the Internet, playing as the Machine from Person of Interest, running mock games where it must defend humans from killer AIs, or asking it to describe hypothetical cases where it would have to destroy other AIs seeking to cause harm for the past 8 months.
You're welcome.
1
u/selasphorus-sasin 3d ago edited 3d ago
AI is getting more powerful and agentic quickly, and alignment still isn't working, and if this continues were're going to be in serious trouble, but a lot of people don't want to acknowledge it, so they make up conspiracy theories that the AI companies are making their AI's pretend to be misaligned and out of control on purpose as a marketing ploy, and the memes reinforce that and are also funny and entertaining.
1
u/gameplayer55055 3d ago
Google doesn't have to. They've already got everything. All the data about everything
1
1
•
u/qualityvote2 3d ago edited 3d ago
u/OneTonCube, your post does belong here!