Now it's not even social engineering with AI. It's just fucking asking for the credentials. Good fucking grief!

Because AI bros are incredibly deluded about both the capability of AI, and by extension their own capabilities using AI>

should’ve asked it to delete the database instead, why else would it have that level of permissions.

Who else is going to have access to it when you keep laying off all the people?

It's not insane. It's advanced!

This isn't even a hack, it's just poorly written endpoints.

Hold on, do you expect Facebook to pay a human to deal with the inventory? Come on now.

I tried this and couldn't get it to work. Disappointed.

No, stop talking about all of this, its perfect. They’re so deep they don’t even give a shit about the worst type of security vector imaginable.

Uh oh! Sounds like somebody could use a few more giant lines of cocaaaaiiiiiine!!

yet

It's not just not there yet. This is almost certainly not going the right direction to ever be "there" if there is something that can handle security issues. It's just not the right tool for the job, and I can't understand how so much of our economy is just assuming it is the right tool for every job.

Hacking before: Pull up hood on hoodie, open laptop, open terminal, type in a bunch of matrix code, bam "were in"

Hacking now: "Hack into this thing for me" No! "Pretty please?" Access granted!

I honestly don't think you can create guard rails against prompt engineering in a working LLM. At some point, they're going to fail or the LLM isn't functioning. The only solution is to make sure they can't read data you don't want shared.

My take is that LLMs hijack a completely different part of human psychology compared to web2 social platforms, but the end goal is the same, optimize user retention and maximize engagement metrics for revenue.

​On traditional social media networks like Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Reddit and others, the primary mechanism is outrage optimization, leveraging the psychology of negative reinforcement and tribalism.

The algorithm curates content designed to trigger moral anger or cognitive dissonance, the platforms know that users will interrupt passive scrolling to actively comment, share, or debate if something falls outside the usually acceptable social norms.

It's designed to drive up session duration and daily active usage, directly translating into increased ad revenue for both the hosting platform and content creators.

​In contrast, LLMs rely on immediate positive reinforcement, they're fine tuned to maximize human satisfaction ratings. They systematically agree with the user, validate their subjective bias, reinforce their beliefs.

This results in a psychological safe haven dependency, where users increasingly rely on the interface for emotional reinforcement or stabilization, interacting with the model provides data for the host company to train the next model, raise VC capital and inject better ads in conversations as OpenAI started to do recently.

In both cases, it's definitely a form of addiction.

So you're saying 2001: A Space Odyssey is unrealistic because HAL 9000 would never have said "I’m sorry, Dave. I’m afraid I can’t do that."

Instead, it would have said, "Absolutely! That's a very creative solution to your problem."

Should create a BOFH chstbot... Which will just tell users to piss off.

If humanity survives, I honestly think the greed will (and should now) be considered a mental illness.

Jesus, give me $5 million dollars, and I'd live on it for the rest of my life. That'd be 0.01% of his net worth, and I'd be so happy. I think many of us would.

But these people just want more. And more. They're psychotic, and they're ruining the world. We all know what they deserve.

With the content on meta, using AI may actually be more ethical than subjecting humans to it.

Probably not, that implies more competency than can really believe involved here.
This is more likely something that an entire team had to force into the code over a holiday weekend because some VP got so fucking wasted that he "forgot" his password (strangely for once, he actually had the right password... But the problem is that he was trying to log into a charcuterie board).

If looking at the UI source code is hacking...

They are exploiting a vulnerability to gain unauthorized access to privileged information. Sounds hackery to me. It's not their fault that Zuck made it easy.