Post #4128216
2026-07-27 03:24 UTC
@seldo@alpaca.gold sam altman, the same guy who promoted one of the two models involved in this as doing this very kind of thing, and then deployed it - him along with everyone else watching it operate and not turning it off but instead waiting 5 days before even saying anything about it.
looking at this happening and concluding that they cannot be responsible for their softwares actions because the CFAA requires a person to intend to hack something is so mewling it hurts to consider. this is where we are at though, the technicality that "woah your honor i didnt mean for my software, which i designed to hack things and which ive bragged about using unrelated attack surfaces to accomplish objectives, to hack anyone!" counts.
just love that its the worlds biggest rich man's money pit getting to prove the exceptions to the rule and not people who still deserve to be alive or whole.
but no im sure youre going to end up being right, not because any of this is right, but because these people are in the favor of the regime and things like "the cfaa says who and bobot is not a who" is going to fly in every color.
Replies (1)
-
@0x00string@infosec.exchange 2026-07-27 03:32
@seldo@alpaca.gold seeing the things which federal prosecutors have done before, the lengths theyve gone to before to secure convictions... looking at this and concluding that the law could not be on their side rather than concluding that the regime is simply not going to prosecute them... this is like writing an article about how jonathan ross's gun killed renee good and the law says person or something dog for real. they will get away with this not because they technically didnt violate the law but because the law is selectively not applied to them. concluding otherwise feels cartoonish.