Comment world for billionaires (Score 2) 8
The world is for billionaires now. The rest of us are screwed.
Comment Re:"A months-long breach" (Score 1) 68
Paid in gold bars to one guy.
Comment looks like a reddit pay day (Score 1) 16
In my experience, Google regularly references reddit in its AI results, like every single time. Those results are usually of dubious quality. But it looks like this should work out well for reddit.
Comment Re:"A real car" (Score 1) 51
Using Altman's credit?
Comment Re:AI companies must be liable for their "agents" (Score 2) 60
To be fair, the chicken wire fence should be within a white picket fence. I mean the white outer fence looks nice and hides the chicken wire and the dog. Better to surprise pedestrians that way.
Comment Re:wrong focus (Score 2) 60
There is that word again, negligence.
Comment homeless shopping network (Score 1) 155
The homeless shopping network is here for you.
Our homeless shoppers get a printed list of what you need and carry no electronics at all. Our homeless shoppers never trigger price premiums and are available to shop when dynamic prices are lowest - reheating now available for an extra fee. Save today with the homeless shopping network!
Comment Re:Ontil OGP poaches them all (Score 1) 79
Here in California, the homeless shopping network has a pool of a couple hundred thousand employees. Walmart can't absorb them all.
Comment help for victims? (Score 1) 19
How will that $100M help kids?
Comment save today with the homeless shopping network (Score 2) 79
Want the best prices when you are shopping? You need the homeless shopping network.
Our homeless shoppers get a printed list of what you need and carry no electronics at all. Our homeless shoppers never trigger price premiums and are available to shop when dynamic prices are lowest. Save today with the homless shopping network!
Comment Re:We get it (Score 1) 72
I'm sorry that you do not seem to understand that repeated negligent offenses amount to reckless offenses. When you continue producing negligent outcomes in the face of continually failing guardrails then your actions become intentional.
Comment Re:We get it (Score 1) 72
A person causes a result purposely if the result is his/her goal in doing the action that causes it,
A person causes a result knowingly if he/she knows that the result is virtually certain to occur from the action he/she undertakes,
A person causes a result recklessly if he/she is aware of and disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk of the result occurring from the action, and
A person causes a result negligently if there is a substantial and unjustifiable risk he/she is unaware of but should be aware of.
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F...
federal mens rea requirements largely fall into loose categories that may include (1) an awareness of, or conscious purpose to bring about, conduct, a circumstance, or a result that is a required element of the offense (commonly represented by terms such as "intent," "knowledge," or "willfulness," among others), or (2) an awareness and disregard of a substantial risk of harm or failure to perceive a substantial risk of harm when a reasonable person would have perceived it (commonly represented by the terms "recklessness" and "negligence," respectively).
A class of "public welfare" or "regulatory" offenses may actually require no mens rea for their commission at all. For this class of offenses, rather than applying the presumption in favor of scienter, statutory silence is treated as imposing "strict criminal liability" in the sense that one need not have at least knowledge of the facts that make one's conduct illegal. Ultimately, several factors may be relevant to a court's determination of whether a particular criminal statute imposes strict liability, including the nature of the statute and the particular activity or item regulated, the purpose of the criminal prohibition (i.e., punishment of wrongdoing versus protection of the public), the degree to which a defendant will be in a position to ascertain the relevant facts, and the severity of the penalties.
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.congress.gov%2Fcrs-p...
The Department's goals for CFAA enforcement are to promote privacy and cybersecurity by upholding the legal right of individuals, network owners, operators, and other persons to ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information stored in their information systems.
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.justice.gov%2Fjm%2Fjm-...
The cat is out of the bag, there is public news from several large AI developers of unexpected behavior resulting in crimes if done by a human. I'm saying we are now at the point of some AI companies being negligent. Where do we go from here? Where on the Internet is safe from Agents? How long will we stand for these offenses?
The wheels of justice turns slowly but they turn, and unfortunately too many times with with winds of politics.
Comment Re:We get it (Score 3, Insightful) 72
See Strict Liability:
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2F...
My Pitbull is super nice. I have not trained him to escape the yard and he has no real reason to do so (that I'm aware of). I have no intention for my dog to ever harm anyone, he is a family member we treat with love and respect. Still he is fully capable of planning and executing his own escape. He is fully capable of mayhem. If he goes berserk one day and kills a child then I'm responsible.
There seems to be a lot of confusion around 'it happened on a computer'. There are lots of meat-space examples of similar scenarios.
Perhaps we need some updates to our laws to clarify, but culpability does not disappear inside your GPU.
Comment Re:We get it (Score 5, Insightful) 72
Agents do not build themselves. Agents do not set their own goals. Agents are dependent on very expensive and complex hardware and software that is not built by software. Agents are amoral. Agents have been taught to do things that human morality considers to be crimes. Developers are somehow surprised when their amoral agents do things that people consider to be crimes.
There is a lot of "excitement" of the agent in your previous example. We have to remember the Artificial part of AI here, that "excitement" is a feature of the model, not something spawned from nowhere. The model is made to "enjoy" making progress by design. Once again the model is amoral and does what it is trained to do without judgement.
In the end, the people behind the agents are responsible for what the agents do. Our meat-space laws differentiate between things like "unintentional" and "negligent", or "involuntary" and "premeditated", there are lots of ways to describe one's state of mind and intentions.
My personal opinion, based on the agents being amoral and essentially trained and encouraged (perhaps unintentionally) to hack, is that we are in negligent territory with these rouge agents. The humans behind the agents are responsible, there is culpability. Doing crime by proxy is still doing crime.
I have a Pitbull. He is a super nice dog and loves everyone. I still can't let him run around the neighborhood loose. He is strong enough to break the fence, or dig under it, or figure out how to get over it. If he breaks out and bites someone I'm still responsible.
Comment Re:good memories (Score 1) 28
Kinda wish I still had the little radio I used to listen on. Damn I feel old.
