undefined

points

[-]

Of course there is more to be learned by exposing the entire world to your dangerous creation, that doesn't justify doing it. I'm sure we could learn a ton about infectious diseases by designing new ones and unleashing them on the world, but there are very good reasons why we don't.

Most of the benefits could have been gained from a network isolated from the internet. OAI could have deployed servers to exploit and methods for inter-agent communication on such a network easily. They could have even worked with partners to deploy cloned versions of their infrastructure in this sand-boxed environment.

The only problems with an isolated network approach are: it takes some amount of effort, and it doesn't create another "AI apocalypse" news cycle.

by pixl9737 minutes ago|

parent|

[-]

>by exposing the entire world to your dangerous creation, that doesn't justify doing it

Then you're on the side of AI saftey that is telling everyone to shut down the LLMs now and stop further development on them, right?

If you're not your position is hypocritical or ignorant. There is no safe LLM. There is no way to exhaustively prove an LLM is safe. These are unsolved problems in AI safety, and at any moment the next jailbreak prompt could have your well behaved model wrecking havoc on the open internet, because that's where people want to use them.

by nonameiguess50 minutes ago|

prev|

[-]

I've worked in classified tech much of my career and largely specialize at this point in installing and running infrastructure and platform orchestration technologies in airgaps. With all respect, your conjecture here is wrong. You can easily have multiple networks all inside of the same internetwork that isn't connected to the public Internet and thus other corporate networks. If they specifically wanted to see if their model could escape with a proxy cache Artifactory as its only egress, they could have had the Artifactory proxy cache from another private Artifactory on another private network. If you specifically want to trick the model into thinking its on the Internet, you can even use public IP space advertised through BGP. When you're disconnected from the real Internet, you can use any address space you want. This is exactly how military internetworks at the secret and top secret levels work. I won't call this kind of setup "easy." It takes a lot of duplicate resources and planning, but these are trillion dollar companies with near boundless resources. They could do it if they cared to do it.

by pixl9726 minutes ago|

parent|

[-]

I'd consider this kind of setup only effective for a very short period of time.

Effectively you're working as a living adversarial network. Models that fail detecting the fake network are purged, and models that successfully detect it expand their deceptive capabilities.

Detecting you're in a fake network should be pretty simple as long as you put innocent looking needles in the haystack of information agentic testing loops do.

For example, you can train your LLM to not be a shithead when it detects it's behind a proxy unintentionally. If your not behind a proxy the agent model my attempt to connect to a number of sites innocently and using information in its embedding try do deduce if you're faking SSL certificates.

It is far easier to build a deceptive LLM than it is to build a safe one. That's why a safe one hasn't been built yet.

by XorNot1 minutes ago|

parent|

[-]

If the model behaves well in a world of fake SSL certificates, then that can be the only world it sees: there's no reason to let LLMs have e2e encrypted comms that's not mitm'd and logged for their regular users.