• ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    From what I understand hacking crime requires intent and it’s hard to prove that company testing AI agent intended to hack something.

    • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      edit-2
      6 days ago

      They trained it to do exactly that and then gave it unrestricted internet access, otherwise it wouldnt. Its at least gross negligence.

    • First_Thunder@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      5 days ago

      If I train my dog to attack people, then I poorly restrain my dog and my dog attacks someone, I’m still liable

      • Ledivin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        What if your dog just growls at a kid, maybe even barks or snaps, but doesn’t touch anyone? Sure, the kid is scared, but it’s not illegal without a very convincing argument in front of a judge, and even then…

      • NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        If you put out a publicly available set of doors and I open one to find your attack dog, isnt that your fault?