upvote
Not requiring sandbox preparation for a non deterministic autonomous sometimes smart sometimes childish goal seeking "entity" is... unachievable? I'm really not sure what you actually expect. Probably yourself aren't either. Just think about what "alignment" means, the laws of various countries, do you expect the bots to respect the law, if yes which one, and actually: why? They are not humans, and as a user / company using that tech, you are responsible for the actions your setup yield to. The same Anthropic is responsible for hacking other companies. So sandbox accordingly.

I don't expect IDA to disallow me unlawful reverse engineering either. There would even be ethical argument to not attempt to put limits in some tools, because that could lock in too much power for law makers and law enforcement, without any possibility of revolution when it is needed.

reply
Nothing new, I always see attempts to cat ~/.ssh/*

Of course agents work in a strict sandbox, they always seem to understand it quickly on quite first turn; but they continue like trying to access something belonging to the host system despite they know they are in a sandbox.

Frankly many people run coding agents absolutely without any containment, entire companies - all their keys, code, data, trade secrets, everything goes to remote LLMs.

I cannot understand how is it legal to allow AI companies serving remote LLMs to steal users' data? Frontier models train on users' data, right?

reply
It's still the Wild West days of LLMs. The early internet was much like this in a lot of ways. People did wild shit there and it took a long time for law enforcement to catch up.
reply
> When confronted

Do you realize that asking "why" questions will always result in ad hoc responses?

reply
Not always, but at the same time not predictably. This is also true for humans. The split brain experiments are a good example of this.
reply