Bing: “I will not harm you unless you harm me first”

Re:Bing: “I will not harm you unless you harm me first” by nradov on Wednesday February 15, 2023 @04:27PM (#34810809)

If I give an automated system the ability to make transactions on my behalf then there is already a risk that someone will misuse it or exploit a security vulnerability. It could be a disgruntled employee, or a hacker in Kazakhstan doing it for the lulz. The existence of LLM AI tools changes nothing here.

It is already possible to order toy pistols sent to the authorities with someone else's name on the order. People use stolen credit card numbers for all sorts of malicious purposes. And have you heard of swatting?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bing: “I will not harm you unless you harm me first” by jodrellblank on Wednesday February 15, 2023 @05:17PM (#34811537)

The existence of LLM AI tools changes things because it used to not exist and now does exist? It used to be that an AI tool could not do things on your behalf because they did not exist, now it could be that they could do things on your behalf because they do exist and people are giving them ability to take actions on the human's behalf. It used to be that a Kazakhstani hacker could find and exploit a security vulnerability once or twice a year, it can now become that millions of people are querying the AI and having it act on their behalf many times per day.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Bing: “I will not harm you unless you harm me first” by nradov on Wednesday February 15, 2023 @05:49PM (#34812009)

The risk has existing for many years with humans and other tools. The addition of one more tool to the mix changes nothing.

[ Parent | on HN ]