Hacker News Reader

Comment by stapedium | Hacker News Reader

If the user input can’t control the demon, then the person or company feeding the demon (ie paying the electric bill and collecting $$$ from users) is responsible. At the end of the day, dogs and cars are the same as data centers. If your dog bites by kid or your car rolls down the hill and hits my house, you are responsible for the damage. AI providers should be held to the same standard.

View on HN

Well it seems we might not be too far from such a demon paying for itself. What then? Perhaps it's already here. I wouldn't know.

Well, I don't think you're going to get very far telling HN, much less the companies with hundreds of billions of dollars spent on AI to stop, unfortunately.

My take on it is there isn't such a thing as a safe LLM, especially one allowed to access tooling. This is very problematic for a lot of people. Again, to all the companies that stops them from unlimited profits. All the open source LLM people get mad because they can't have little demon spawn running around either.

So yea, it's a mess.

The user input can control the demon most of the way, most of the time!

We don't know how to obtain full, absolute, guaranteed control over a demon while still having a useful demon. Might be impossible. Forbidden knowledge be like that - it's not the best thing if you want your life to be full of certainties.

But the demons are very useful. And they're getting more useful still. So we aren't about to stop.

By the dog owner analogy, I think you meant AI users that effectuated this attack should be held responsible, not the dog's parents.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com