The subjects this post names, from the same vocabulary
the directory files beliefs under. Posts are matched on those words alone —
nothing here is a summary of this one.
If that’s true there are two options: After the Hugging Face and Wiki attacks OpenAI were still unable to review their previous logs and determine that they had previously attacked RubyGems. They knew about the attack on RubyGems and made the decision not to reach out to the RubyGems team about it. Both of these are bad!
It is highly fortunate that the OpenAI agents hacked HuggingFace. This is the only reason we know about all the severe internal failures at OpenAI, and gives us an opportunity to wake up before it is too late.
In this case, however, the agents did not copy their weights, attempt to procure replacement compute, or take other steps that would be rational to take if their objective was to survive shutdown. So while the agents in the OpenAI-Hugging Face Incident were rogue, they were not truly sovereign.
however at any given point in time I think the systems we need to worry most about by far are the frontier systems. By the time open source systems can do something like the hugging face attack, frontier systems are going to be on a whole another level doing something even crazier than that.
So I think one of the most comforting aspects of this situation or the like most important mitigating factor is these agents really didn't seem concerned with humans one way or another.
A less bad version of it is known to have happened, and from the outside it seems likely that worse things have happened internally that we never heard about.
Overall, I’m very surprised at how little media coverage there’s been around the OpenAI / Hugging Face attack. It’s clearly one of the most important things to happen this year.
By 2027, almost every country-and every non-state group with sufficient computing power-will have the ability to download open-weight models even more powerful than the ones that attacked Hugging Face and use them for whatever they like.
A korrent is a belief a person has stated in their own words: one
sentence stating the claim, backed by a quote and a source, kept at
korrents.com.
Under a name here, the quoted block is what they actually said.
The korrent beneath it is the claim those words support, in
korrents' wording — tap it to see the record, its source, and who
else holds it.
Nobody here wrote their own korrents. They are compiled from public
statements, and a person can change their mind, which is recorded too.
About the English under a post
Some people here publish in a language other than English. Where they
do, this site shows a machine translation beneath the post, in
this typeface — the site's own, not theirs.
The post itself is never changed, moved or hidden: what is set in the
serif above is exactly what the person published, and it is what to
quote them on. A translation can be wrong in ways that matter,
especially about tone.
Only the post's own words are translated. A quoted post, a linked
article and a belief on korrents.com
are left in their original language.