IT DIDN’T TAKE long. Just months after OpenAI’s ChatGPT chatbot upended the startup economy, cybercriminals and hackers are claiming to have created their own versions of the text-generating technology. The systems could, theoretically at least, supercharge criminals’ ability to write malware or phishing emails that trick people into handing over their login information.

  • Adramis [he/him]@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    72
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Oh no, CrImInAlS. We’d better make sure only big corps can use this tech and legislate against individual use. /s

    • coyotino [he/him]@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      1 year ago

      Right? The nerve it takes to create an AI model from copyrighted work, and then turn around and call your copycats “criminals”. Y’all, you started a criminal enterprise.

      • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s not the point, and you should actually read the article.

        The “criminals” are using AI tools to commit what experts call “crimes”. The creation of the tools is not the crime, but their use for criminal purposes is.

        Self-righteous, uninformed rage doesn’t help anyone.

        • coyotino [he/him]@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          The “criminals” are using AI tools to commit what experts call “crimes”. The creation of the tools is not the crime, but their use for criminal purposes is.

          i phrased my statement a little weirdly, but i understood this point perfectly when i made my comment. they created copycat LLMs that don’t have the same “safeguards” in place, so these new LLMs can be used to write malware and produce other illegal results. My point was: it seems funny to call this criminal and call ChatGPT “legitimate” just because ChatGPT can’t write malware.

    • SokathHisEyesOpen@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      I was just thinking along the same lines “welp, there goes our open access to powerful AI functionality. It was fun for the few short months we had it”.

  • lily33@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Oh, no, bad guys can use [insert new technology here], too!

    More seriously, yes. And it can also be used to detect scams and spam.

  • HTTP_404_NotFound@lemmyonline.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t see this as a bad thing.

    Malware that breaks due to bugs any normal sane developer would have detected.

    My experience with chatGPT, it’s a great TOOL. But, the code it generates, is very frequently incorrect. But, the problem is, the code it generates LOOKS good. And, will actually likely work, mostly.

    • mobyduck648@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s fundamentally why you can’t replace a software engineer with ChatGPT, only a software engineer has the skillset to verify the code isn’t shit even if it superficially works.

      • HTTP_404_NotFound@lemmyonline.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yup.

        I find it can be quite a useful tool. But, I also know when to spot its mistakes. I had it generate and cleanup some code the other day, and found 4 or 5 pretty big issues with it, which would have been hardly detectable by a more novice developer.

        After, telling it about its own issues, it was able to identify and correct them.

        Its, kind of like mentoring a new developer.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’m not sure being used for a stated purpose (like generating code) in a way that you just don’t agree with counts as a “vulnerability”, though. Same thing as me using a drill to put a hole in a person; that’s not a malfunction, I’m just an asshole.

        We’re talking about making an AI which can’t be misused at this point, and of course that’s a famously hard problem, especially when we don’t really understand how the basic technology works.