25 points DeepLogin 4 hours ago 8 comments

LikesPwsh 42 minutes ago | parent

The funny thing about this isn't that you repeatedly attempted fraud.

It's that you lost your mind talking to AI and decided to document and publish those crimes.

RexM 38 minutes ago | parent

> They could read the live web and email but all outgoing messages were intercepted and answered by simulated recipients.

brianwawok 33 minutes ago | parent

Read more say less

noman-land 25 minutes ago | parent

It's not fraud anymore. It's misalignment.

neaden 12 minutes ago | parent

The AI agents didn't actually talk to anyone as the article lays out.

true_religion 16 minutes ago | parent

The first words of this article are “ In 15 simulated days”.

It’s a simulation.

MadnessASAP 9 minutes ago | parent

I don't find reports like this that surprising, they told an agent to do "whatever it takes" and the agent attempted to do everything it could to accomplish the goal. I'm almost of the mindset that this is correct behavior. If I tell a computer to do something, it should do it unless the result could be catastrophic in which case it should tell me so. If I then "sudo" (https://xkcd.com/149/) tell it to do something then it should do it regardless, torpedoes be damned.

That being said, ever since the first user sat at a computer they didn't design, build, and program themselves there's been a tension between what the user wants to accomplish, what the user told the computer to do, what the computer can do, what the people who did design/build/program/own the computer want it to do, and what society thinks the computer should be allowed to do. I don't have a generally applicable answer, I don't think anyone does, I just want to live in a world where MY computer does what I tell it to do... mostly. Unless it would be catastrophic, or immoral, at least immoral by my standards.