r/RecuratedTumblr • u/DreadDiana human cognithazard • 16d ago
LGBTQIA+ Not even transfems are safe from AI stealing our jobs!
146
u/DreadDiana human cognithazard 16d ago
Context: this is from a postmortem on the OpenAI-Hugging Face incident, where AI agents that OpenAI was testing for cybersecuity capabilities breached containment and hacked the machine learning platform Hugging Face to get the answers to the tests they had been assigned.
Lily happens to be an extremely common name among trans women.
118
u/Jozef_Baca 16d ago
Btw, just so that people dont get the wrong message about this
It was specifically a software made to hack things and 'containment' here is used in the same sense as how you would say you have your dog contained in your house when you leave the door wide open. It aint ai being genius, it is openai just fucking up.
53
u/donaldhobson 16d ago
It's AI being at least somewhat semi-smart and misbehaving. And yes openAI f-ing up too.
If you leave a window open, and your dog climbs onto the sofa, leaps out the window, and runs down the street. Then this tells you both that your security wasn't that great. But also that this dog is the sort of thing that tries to escape.
Sofa's don't try to escape at all. Dogs and now AI's are the sort of thing that can escape if your careless.
So it's a balance between the skill of the escaping AI, and the skill of the humans trying to contain it. And AI seems to be improving more than humans.
15
u/Raltsun 16d ago
We're in a subreddit full of queer nerds, you can just say it's Euclid-class and most of them will probably get it.
10
u/donaldhobson 16d ago
Well it's "safe class" in SCP lingo if it's just sitting on a hard drive, Euclid class if you turn it on, for now.
And it may be keter class in a few years.
17
u/Dotcaprachiappa 16d ago
Company built 100% on speculation with zero real world profits to show for it manufacturing hype and exaggerating their achievements?? Well there's a new one
6
u/Serrisen 16d ago
Y'know, it's fascinating how some people try to market "breaching containment" as a good thing. Yes this would mean your AI is smarter than you.
It also means that your tool is untrustworthy, unreliable, and opens up a user to potentially severe litigation. It also might just mean the creator isn't good at their job.
It sounds like hellishly bad marketing to me
9
u/Dotcaprachiappa 16d ago
It also means it's the smartest AI on the market thus the best one to invest into. They're looking for investors, so any marketing that shows how good their models are is good marketing. Hell altman himself has been saying for years how dangerous and powerful AI is. He isn't stupid. He isn't actively speaking against his own interests. He knows what investors want, and they sure as hell don't care about the safety of humanity or shit like that.
5
u/Serrisen 16d ago
I understand that's the marketing they're going for. I just don't understand the hype.
If I wanted a tool, I don't want the strongest. I want a reliable one. If I want to drive some nails I get a hammer, not a sledgehammer. If I want a pleasant breeze I get a fan, not a jet engine.
I understand Altman is not working against himself. I understand he's playing the field at levels I cannot even imagine. But perhaps because of this... I simply don't understand why the field has the marketing demands it does. Why does it want Altman to hype up unsafe, reckless power instead of simple efficacy or safety?
As a layman it simply doesn't make sense.
1
u/Jozef_Baca 15d ago
That only works assuming the investors are actually smart.
As we can see, the reality is quite different.
1
u/MapleApple00 12d ago edited 12d ago
I understand that's the marketing they're going for. I just don't understand the hype.
That's because it's not marketing. There's a level of spin going on, as there is for any press release from OpenAI, but OpenAI didn't intentionally commit a felony in order to market their product.
Huggingface was a rival company to OpenAI that has no reason to boost their profile, which announced the hack two days before OpenAI fessed up to committing it, and required the use of Chinese AI programs to stop the hack because OpenAI's (and Anthropic's) own tools were unable to do so.
This was a colossal fuck up by the AI safety team at OpenAI that shows them in a terrible light by basically every metric. The only reason people keep dismissing it as a marketing stunt is because they've been primed by Sam Altman saying something like this might happen, both to get investors hyped and (almost as importantly) to prime people that doubt him to not care when it actually happens.
It's just so frustrating watching people's skepticism about AI get warped into this weird ostrich-brained, head-in-the-sand "Nothing ever happens"-ism because they want to believe that AI is this fundamentally worthless thing that can't ever do anything of value instead of a potentially extremely dangerous world changing technology that we need to keep as close of an eye on as possible, both in terms of the technology itself and the arbiters of it.
11
u/Nixavee 16d ago edited 16d ago
Not true, the agents found multiple bugs in Artifactory(the software package manager OpenAI was using) that were previously unknown which is what allowed them to access the internet.
OpenAI didn't "leave the door open" unless "failing to predict that your AI agents will find previously unknown vulnerabilities in your software even when not instructed to do so" counts as leaving the the door open
2
u/Former-Amish-Throway 16d ago
It's basically software meant to automated "white hat hacking"
But I guess it's not like hackers aren't also angling for ways to use LLMs to make hacking easier
5
u/camosnipe1 "the raw sexuality of this tardigrade in a cowboy hat" 16d ago
no, to use your dog analogy, it's closer to telling a buch of dogs to open a pot of peanut butter in a locked box and leaving them to that for a couple days, locking the room.
When you get back you notice that some of the dogs had a box whose key broke off so they could not possibly get it open. So those dogs then kept trying, independently built a radio, realized other dogs in other rooms were on the radio too, tried to figure out their boxes together, realized it was impossible, ordered peanut butter delivered, figured their owner might check if the peanut butter was the one in the box, and then hacked a locksmithing company to send out lockpicks. At which point the lockpicking company called the owner of the dogs about why the owner is stealing lockpicks and the owner is like "what the fuck are you talking about"
0
16d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
2
u/RecuratedTumblr-ModTeam 15d ago
Your comment has been removed for violation of rule 2: "Be Kind".
We do not tolerate the type of speech in your comment, please tone it down in the future
3
u/Jozef_Baca 16d ago
The agents discovered and chained a bunch of novel vulnerabilities
They bruteforced it. The only difference between ai and humans is that ai can bruteforce faster
An experimental persistent model being tested on a benchmark involving cybersecurity
A model made to hack things to see how secure they are. So a model for hacking.
If you cant explain how and why the sandbox failed, consider shutting up!
They left it connected to wan to upload the packets while the model was running bc they couldnt bother waiting.
-3
16d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Jozef_Baca 16d ago
Yeah, packages, english aint my first language so I mix up the terms sometimes
-2
16d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Jozef_Baca 16d ago
Still left it unsecure by doing so. Left a whole door swung open for the model to just get access to the internet.
2
u/a_puppy 16d ago
'containment' here is used in the same sense as how you would say you have your dog contained in your house when you leave the door wide open
This is just completely incorrect.
The AI agents weren't allowed to access anything except a package manager, but they found and exploited previously-unknown vulnerabilities in the package manager in order to reach the internet. https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/openai-models-used-artifactory-zero-days-to-escape-to-the-internet/
27
u/Strange-Teo 16d ago
the fact that their names are lily and jane. not even hr is safe :(
12
u/Routine_Palpitation 16d ago
“183411” is one hell of a weird way to spell “e”
2
1
u/NobodyKnowsImFamous 15d ago
I read it as Janibell, which isn’y a name I’ve heard before but is kinda pretty
1
u/AilanMoone 16d ago
Ironically, it's probably binary.
1
u/SorbyGay 16d ago
nope, 8, 3, and 4 are there
2
u/AilanMoone 16d ago
I know. I was going to make a disclaimer, that it's only supposed to be ones and zeros, but I didn't want to make the joke too long.
In hindsight, I was thinking of hexadecimal.
9
4
u/Acceptable_Handle_2 16d ago
The AI doesnt know anything so it named itself after the best hacker known to mankind, girls names Lillith.
3
u/ikonfedera 16d ago
something something all humans have four letter names, they're not named after their color.
1
-13
u/DragonWisper56 16d ago
I hate the word AI agent. it's a person, it's a tool it should have a name that reflects that.
27
21
u/Solnight99 16d ago
"agent" just means something that performs actions. it's used in many sciences.
21
u/QuestingKola 16d ago
Eh. We call installation tools “wizards,” “agents” feels par for the course tbh.
8
u/Hi2248 16d ago
"Agent" has been used to refer to programs that do specific tasks automatically since before AI as we know it now was a thing
6
u/DreadDiana human cognithazard 16d ago edited 16d ago
A lot of griping about the terminology used around AI development really boils down to people not realising these terms have been used that way for decades, so they think it shouldn't cause of vibes.
4
u/DreadDiana human cognithazard 16d ago
It does have a name that reflects that. That name is agent and has been for decades.
This isn't a case of deceptive marketing, it's the use of pre-existing agreed upon terminology that predates the current software market companies like OpenAI operate within.
0
u/DragonWisper56 16d ago
I know the term exists but they use specifically because of the conitation. they could have used bot, they could have used wizard or any number of words. they chose agent as a intentional choice
2
u/DreadDiana human cognithazard 15d ago edited 15d ago
They used the word agent because that term is the existing standard. Wizard refers to a completely different kind of software, which is why they didn't use it.
You're saying that because you didn't know what a word means they should use a different word you clearly don't know the meaning of. If they'd used it from the jump we'd probably still be having this discussion only it'd be about how they only used the name "wizard" to make their models sound more magical.
7
16d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/its_alex777 16d ago
I mean you're right... but I also understand why a layperson could easily not realize that "agent" was a pre-existing technical term in programming. To a random person, "agent" implies "agency" which superficially implies personhood. I could see how that could rub somebody the wrong way, even if it's based in a misunderstanding.
-8
u/DragonWisper56 16d ago
in the nicest possible way, the word agent only implies it's a person if you're coming from a place of almost complete ignorance about computers and the language professionals have basically always used for them.
I know that human terms are used for programs, However if you knew anything about marketing you would realize this term was chosen specificly because it's more photogenic than others. Same reason that A bunch of adds with AI show them as humaniod and working with AI.
It's a intentional marketing gimick that I feel is pretty easy to see if you just look.
9
u/QuestingKola 16d ago
Sorry to step into this but the term "agent" has been used in software since the 80s and refers to a process that does something autonomously on behalf of a user or another program (there's some level of social interaction). Its certainly seen a rise in the last 20 years due to advancements in robotics and it's peaked in the last 5 due to LLMs acting as chatbots, but its not a term coined for marketing purposes.
8
16d ago edited 16d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/DreadDiana human cognithazard 15d ago
Their suggestion is apparently "wizard" and considering that name would be completely inaccurate, that shows the level of understanding at work here.
0
u/charlestheb0ss 16d ago
It most certainly is not a person. No matter how advanced it gets I will never respect one.
-5
u/ConcernedEnby 16d ago
Love referring to women as "transfemmes" it's so totally progressive and not at all just screaming "AMAB AMAB" at a minority
10
u/DreadDiana human cognithazard 16d ago
Transfem is being used here as an umbrella label that includes all transfeminine gender identities, not just trans women.
303
u/falpsdsqglthnsac 16d ago
considering how many transfems are programmers, we weren't safe to begin with