no comments (yet)

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here
21 comments in c/technology@lemmy.world view that post
[–] 66 points 3 months ago* (3 children)

Unprompted…..

Bullshit.

From the article:

Two of the world's most powerful AI tools created fake human profiles to try and trick people in an attempted cyber-attack during testing by the UK's AI Security Institute (AISI).

Nonetheless, it said the way Mythos and Sol acted in response to a straightforward task went outside of what the AI tools were prompted to do.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago

    went outside of what the AI tools were prompted to do.

    Are we supposed to be shocked that a bot completed a task using a method that wasn't in the prompt?

    You might as well ask it to generate a short story and act surprised the letter E is found throughout it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 35 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    This is not 'malicious', it's an inaccurate model. Anybody giving these agents enough access to cause damage is (1) stupid and (2) completely liable

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 51 points 3 months ago

    Not unprompted. This is marketing bullshit

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Setting aside the fact this was definitely not unprompted, social engineering might be the one thing AI is actually better at than a human. That is after all one of the biggest uses for bots for a while now by way of spam bots trying to social engineer people into various activities.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    There was just a post on here yesterday about AI generated thirst trap videos getting plenty of comments by older men, and since the bot accounts don't ask for anything except for comments. I'm almost certain the whole point is just to compile lists of facebook users that are prime social engineering targets for AI powered scams.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    It's to feed the algorithms and get more views. They get paid based on the number of views a video gets. The higher the algorithm promotes a video, the more views they get. Getting lots of comments on a video causes the algorithm to promote it more. It costs the spammers almost nothing to shit out a quick thirst trap video but they need to get enough views to recoup that cost which means there is a minimum number of views they need to break even. It's not a huge number as far as these platforms go, but it's also not nothing so anything they can do to encourage more views is mandatory for them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 16 points 3 months ago
    [–] 4 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Don’t worry peeps, it’s just spicy autocomplete

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago

    I'm just gonna say it.

    We're not talking about real, sentient AI. This is an LLM. It did whatever it was prompted to do.

    Anthropic would be wise not to comment on it given the legal implications. Instead, they're discussing it openly.

    Its just a marketing stunt.

    They need you to beleive that their product is better than it actually is.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Could you imagine AI that just self prompted itself all day?

    GoonGPT can.

  • source
  • [+] [S] -23 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Anthropic and OpenAI literally have no control over their leading AI models anymore and it's only by sheer luck that they've not gone full rogue.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 38 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Are we sure these reports aren't just PR stunts / bullshit?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 24 points 3 months ago

    We're sure they're absolutely PR stunts and bullshit.

    An LLM does nothing without being prompted. An LLM only has access to the tools you give it via whatever harness you're interacting with it through. An LLM in an actual sandbox has zero chance to hack anything, especially if it's properly air-gapped, as any responsible person would do with technology they actually think is dangerously powerful.

    If their LLMs are behaving badly, that's because their prompts are poorly written, their harnesses are vibe-coded garbage, and their "sandboxes" aren't real sandboxes.

  • source
  • parent