It is difficult to fathom how pathetic this is and it shows how these companies primarily rely on fear and FOMO to sell crap.

all 20 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 16 points 1 week ago (8 children)

This is ridiculous. Three companies suddenly claim that their AIs all went on a hacking spree in the exact same way, one after the other? Reeks of marketing scheme

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Maybe Anthropic and Meta started double checking their shitty vibe-coded "sandboxes" in response to OpenAI story? And their "sandboxes" were shit enough their chat-bots managed to slip out just slopping their way through and poking at the obvious things.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • This is the most charitable explanation and I think the most likely. Largely because it requires everyone involved to be even less competent for even longer and simply not notice the glaring holes in what they claim is the most important security feature in human history because, presumably, the chatbot kept telling them it was fine.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    @lurker @supersquirrel
    No, it's convergent evolution:
    The models are all getting good at cyber offense.
    The labs all use third parties for evaluation.
    Third parties forget to turn off security measures during evaluation because when humans are told to do the same thing, they stay within the lines, so it's not a habit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago* (1 child)

    Third parties forget to turn off security measures

    So they forget how to build a proper sandbox and turn off proper security measures for the allegedly very dangerous tool. Oh look at that, it hacked things! Right after two other companies ALSO had a press tour about hacking things! (which was also in part because of human incompetence!) guess we have no choice but to do the same press tour shitck!

    How awfully convenient

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    @lurker
    Many security companies are not the best at software engineering. (I don't know about the ones used here in particular.)
    I honestly do not believe this was orchestrated. I've seen similar security consultant mistakes for humans in the past.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 child)

    I mean I find it pretty hard to believe all of the big 3 AI companies have security breaches that happened in roughly the exact same ways around the same time frame. Anthropic is suspicious because they came out with their hacking stories after the HuggingFace incident even though one of the incidents happened months ago.

    Even if the incidents themselves were pure unfortunate coincidence, the fact they all came out about it after the OpenAI incident is certainly suspicious

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 week ago

    I'm looking forward to Elon's desperate attempts to make Grok have a hacking incident so he can keep up!

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

    With all these copycats for the critihype, if waymo ever accidentally runs over an engineer, you do not want to be an engineer at Tesla.

    But seems consumer AI money ran out and they gunning for the big cybersecurity/gov hacking money now.

    (From consumer, "give the ai your bank details, so it can plan your vacation it is safe" to this, amusing. Oddly reminded how this consumer first then the big bucks in business/gov is also how randsomware worked).

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 week ago

    Meta is the cringe misfit who brings warm yoghurt to the AI circle jerk.

  • source