5 ms·

I wonder what is required for it to cross the line into criminal blackmail.

by bawolff 8d ago

dgellow 8d ago
From the company that likely committed federal crimes by hacking Hugginface
- numpad0 8d ago
  One thing that wasn't obvious to me or adults around me when I was younger: most laws define whatever acts a law punishes as individuals commiting to it, not as situations manifesting anyhow. It's not a murder just because someome died hit by a bullet you fired, but you have to have personally decided to kill that person leading to their death[1][2]. OpenAI's LLMs are not humans, and neither is the company. So by this logic, I think there's a chance that nobody committed a crime by hacking Huggingface, and also the chance that a lot of military and police organizational orders become illegal if OAI's doings would be illegal. IANAL and all I have is a bucket of popcorns, though. 1: not a meaningful defense in a real trial, also gross negligence exists 2: this also explains insanity defense; if you were so out of your mind that you could not have held such a thought, it is considered out of scope for justice systems
  - bawolff 8d ago
    > OpenAI's LLMs are not humans Neither are guns. Which is why we punish the person shooting the gun and not the gun. Industrial equipment, which is how i would classify LLMs, hurting people is nothing new. The relevant questions are: - did someone intend it to happen? - was someone negligent in taking reasonable steps to prevent something foreseeable? The justice system doesn't punish people for legitimate accidents. e.g. if you are shooting at a shooting range, take all reasonable precautions, but someone was hiding behind the target, you are probably not guilty even if you shoot the guy. As far as openAI goes, the logic is the same. The question is, was it intentional, was it unintentional but reasonable precautions weren't taken or was it truly an accident?
    - numpad0 7d ago
      I mean, they are going to be at least culpable for gross negligence, but who made the decision might become an interesting point of discussions(mainly in deciding precisely how they should be punched in their face and less in whether they should be at all).
    - ted_dunning 8d ago
      And the third time it happens, is that still just an accident?
      - bawolff 7d ago
        The justice system relies on evidence not vibes.

I wonder what is required for it to cross the line into criminal blackmail.

dgellow 8d ago

From the company that likely committed federal crimes by hacking Hugginface

numpad0 8d ago
One thing that wasn't obvious to me or adults around me when I was younger: most laws define whatever acts a law punishes as individuals commiting to it, not as situations manifesting anyhow. It's not a murder just because someome died hit by a bullet you fired, but you have to have personally decided to kill that person leading to their death[1][2]. OpenAI's LLMs are not humans, and neither is the company. So by this logic, I think there's a chance that nobody committed a crime by hacking Huggingface, and also the chance that a lot of military and police organizational orders become illegal if OAI's doings would be illegal. IANAL and all I have is a bucket of popcorns, though. 1: not a meaningful defense in a real trial, also gross negligence exists 2: this also explains insanity defense; if you were so out of your mind that you could not have held such a thought, it is considered out of scope for justice systems
- bawolff 8d ago
  > OpenAI's LLMs are not humans Neither are guns. Which is why we punish the person shooting the gun and not the gun. Industrial equipment, which is how i would classify LLMs, hurting people is nothing new. The relevant questions are: - did someone intend it to happen? - was someone negligent in taking reasonable steps to prevent something foreseeable? The justice system doesn't punish people for legitimate accidents. e.g. if you are shooting at a shooting range, take all reasonable precautions, but someone was hiding behind the target, you are probably not guilty even if you shoot the guy. As far as openAI goes, the logic is the same. The question is, was it intentional, was it unintentional but reasonable precautions weren't taken or was it truly an accident?
  - numpad0 7d ago
    I mean, they are going to be at least culpable for gross negligence, but who made the decision might become an interesting point of discussions(mainly in deciding precisely how they should be punched in their face and less in whether they should be at all).
  - ted_dunning 8d ago
    And the third time it happens, is that still just an accident?
    - bawolff 7d ago
      The justice system relies on evidence not vibes.