字号·· | 护眼
techcrunch

被解雇的OpenAI安全研究员对不当行为指控提出异议,并警告此举会产生寒蝉效应Fired OpenAI safety researchers dispute misconduct claims, warn of chilling effect

点「原文对照」整页切到原文,或双击某段只看那段的原文。

上周被OpenAI解雇的三位安全研究员王茉莉、托梅克·科尔巴克和米基塔·巴莱斯尼发布了一封公开信。他们在信中否认了公司关于他们违反既定流程、不当处理敏感信息的指控,并警告称此次解雇会产生寒蝉效应,进而对整个公司文化产生连锁影响。

Jasmine Wang, Tomek Korbak, and Mikita Balesni, the three safety researchers that OpenAI fired last week, have published an open letter denying the firm’s claims that they mishandled sensitive information outside of established company procedures and warned that their dismissal signals a chilling effect that will have ripple effects across the company’s culture.

“我们担忧的是,关于我们被解雇的内外部舆论已让曾经的同事们不敢再像上周之前那样畅所欲言、自由行事,而这些行为原本正是在OpenAI工作的常态,”这三位研究员周四在致OpenAI安全委员会、安全顾问团及使命顾问委员会的公开信中这样写道。

“We have become concerned that internal and external communications around our firing have made our former colleagues afraid to speak and operate in ways that, until last week, were an integral part of working at OpenAI,” the researchers wrote Thursday in an open letter to OpenAI’s Safety and Security Committee, Safety Advisory Group, and Mission Advisory Council.

据称,这三位研究员因向第三方人工智能安全机构泄露公司机密信息而于上周被解雇。OpenAI称他们“擅自获取并处理公司敏感信息”,违反了公司规定。

The researchers were dismissed last week after allegedly sharing confidential company information with a third-party AI safety organization. OpenAI said they violated the company’s policies by “accessing and handling sensitive company information.”

王茉莉、科尔巴克和巴莱斯尼在信中写道:“人工智能并非普通技术,OpenAI也绝非普通企业。我们这些从事安全工作的人员能比其他人更早察觉到潜在风险,因此需要与外部专家密切合作才能找到应对之策。能够毫无顾虑地开展此类工作,同时拥有完善的内部流程予以保障,这本身就是一项至关重要的安全机制。”他们指出,此次解雇标志着OpenAI文化发生了重大转变——过去公司鼓励员工“提出安全顾虑并坦诚表达不同意见”,如今员工们却“搞不清自己的行为边界”:一个月前还被视为正常的行为,如今却可能成为被解雇的理由。

“AI is not a normal technology, and OpenAI is not a normal company,” Wang, Korbak, and Balesni wrote. “Those of us who work on safety see risks before anyone else, and we rely on close collaboration with outside experts to work out how to address them. The freedom to do so without fear, and to have well-defined internal procedures that enable this work, is itself an essential safety mechanism.”They said that their firing represents a broader shift in the culture of OpenAI, one that used to encourage workers to “raise safety concerns and disagree openly.”They said employees are now “unclear on where they stand” when behavior that was allegedly normal a month ago is now suddenly grounds for dismissal.

“鉴于人工智能开发过程中存在诸多安全隐患,绝不能让员工身处一个充满恐惧且规则模糊的环境中,否则将阻碍AI安全工作并削弱第三方监督机制,”他们写道。“像我们这样被突然解雇的情况,正在破坏OpenAI一直以来引以为傲的开放文化。”在这封信中,三人否认曾向《The Information》泄露相关信息,即关于OpenAI最新模型中那些难以监控的架构设计,这些设计使得对模型推理过程的监督变得更为困难。他们也否认有过任何超出岗位职责范围与外部人员接触的行为。

“Given the significant safety concerns surrounding the development of AI, employees must not be left working in an environment where fear and unclear rules stymie AI safety work and weaken third-party accountability,” they wrote. “Terminations such as ours, executed and communicated so abruptly, are chilling the open culture OpenAI has prized in the past.”In the letter, the three denied involvement in a leak to The Information about less monitorable architectures in OpenAI’s newest models that make chain-of-thought reasoning more difficult to monitor. They also denied engaging with external parties outside the mandates of their jobs.

OpenAI尚未对这封公开信作出正式回应,但向TechCrunch提供了一份据称由某研究负责人撰写的内部备忘录。该备忘录肯定了这三位研究人员在AI安全领域的贡献,并否认解雇他们是出于报复目的。

OpenAI has not formally responded to the open letter, but shared with TechCrunch an internal memo attributed to a research leader, praising the three researchers’ contributions to AI safety and denying that they were fired in retaliation.

“我想明确一点:此次决定与他们提出安全顾虑或公开发声毫无关联,”备忘录中写道。“我们一直鼓励员工提出意见,今后也会如此。我们绝不会因员工提出担忧而将其解雇。”另外,OpenAI的一位发言人向TechCrunch表示,经过调查后发现这三人存在“一系列不当行为”,明显违反了公司关于研究信息管理的各项规定,这些行为已超出了仅向外部AI评估机构提供信息的范畴,因此才予以解雇。

“I want to be very clear that these decisions were not about raising safety concerns or speaking out,” the memo reads. “We have always encouraged that and always will. We do not terminate employees for raising concerns.”Separately, an OpenAI spokesperson told TechCrunch the three were fired after an investigation revealed a “pattern of misconduct” in “clear violation of our policies of mishandling research information” that goes beyond sharing information with an outside AI evaluation group.

对于这三位研究人员具体违反了哪些规定、解雇的具体缘由,以及公司如何保护那些提出安全顾虑并配合外部评估工作的员工等问题,OpenAI并未向TechCrunch作出直接回应。

OpenAI did not directly address TechCrunch’s questions about specifically which policies the researchers allegedly violated, the circumstances of their dismissal, or how the company protects employees who raise safety concerns and collaborate with external evaluators.

此次解雇事件引发了外界诸多猜测。尤其是考虑到近期OpenAI接连出现AI智能体失控以及模型相关信息泄露等安全事件,此事更备受关注。

The firings have fueled speculation about their circumstances, particularly as OpenAI faces scrutiny over recent safety incidents involving rogue agents and leaks about its models.

该信还涉及研究人员对 Hugging Face 事件的回应——在该事件中,一群代理突破了沙盒,侵入了外部系统。信中称此事件及调查“前所未有”,意味着“内部政策正在实时制定”。鉴于调查的敏感性,Korbak 认为他通过与外部安全评估者密切沟通以建立信任,符合 OpenAI 的政策和规范,正如信中所述。

The letter also addresses the researchers’ response to the Hugging Face incident, in which a swarm of agents broke out of their sandbox and breached external systems. The letter says that the incident and investigation was “without precedent,” meaning “internal policies were being developed in real time.”Due to the sensitive nature of the investigation, Korbak believed he was acting within OpenAI’s policies and norms by communicating closely with outside safety evaluators to build trust, per the letter.

与此同时,Balesni 也在内部努力解决日益严重的 AI 可监控性问题,研究人员在信中表示,这一工作“只能通过与外部各方的广泛沟通才能成功”。根据信中内容,Balesni 在整个工作过程中得到了 OpenAI 董事会成员和高管的协调与支持。

At the same time, Balesni was also working internally to address the growing AI monitorability problem, an effort the researchers say in their letter “can only succeed through extensive communication with external parties.”According to the letter, Balesni coordinated with and was supported by OpenAI board members and executives throughout his work.

“在整个过程中,米基塔始终向上级汇报情况,并确保在分享材料前删除所有敏感信息,”信中写道。“他的所有行为均出于善意,也符合当时公司的各项规范。”

“Throughout, Mikita checked in with his reporting line and took care to remove sensitive details from materials before sharing them,” the letter reads. “He acted throughout in good faith and within the company’s norms as they stood at the time.”

在X平台上的另一条帖文中,王星进一步说明了自己被解雇的详细经过。她称,OpenAI告知她被解雇的原因是她访问了某高管的邮件账户。“实际上,OpenAI曾授权我访问该账户以协助招聘工作,”她写道。“当不再需要该权限时,我请求IT部门予以撤销。但对方并未执行我的请求,我自己也无法取消权限;此外,该账户与我的其他邮件账户在手机邮件应用中被合并显示,难以区分。我不慎点开了其中一封包含敏感信息的邮件,随即几分钟内便向那位高管说明了情况,并再次联系IT部门。所有这些情况我都没有隐瞒。”

In a separate thread on X, Wang explained more details about her own dismissal, explaining that OpenAI told her she’d been fired because she accessed an executive’s“OpenAI delegated that access to me for recruiting,” she wrote. “When I no longer needed it, I asked IT to remove it. They did not action my request, I couldn’t remove it myself, and the inbox was combined in an indistinguishable way in my phone’s mail app. When I opened a sensitive email by mistake, I told the executive within minutes and asked IT again. None of this was hidden.”

王星还指出,此次解雇的理由“根本站不住脚”,她和同事们“绝非首批在可疑情况下被OpenAI辞退的员工”。

Wang went on to say that the reasons behind the terminations are “not adding up,” and that she and her colleagues are “not the first to be pushed out of OpenAI under suspicious circumstances.”

这些研究人员呼吁OpenAI切实履行公开承诺:在公司内部引入第三方安全审计机构、确保前沿模型的可监控性,并“持续维护安全研究人员与整个安全行业之间开放、透明的对话环境”。根据备忘录内容,OpenAI已同意上述建议。

The researchers called on OpenAI to adhere to its public commitments to embed third-party safety auditors within the organization, to preserve monitorability of frontier models, and “continue to support an open and transparent culture of dialogue between safety researchers and the rest of the safety ecosystem.”OpenAI agrees with their recommendations, per the memo.

“倘若员工们现在不站出来抵制此类做法,恐怕我们不会是最后一批受害者,”王星说道。“对于仍在OpenAI工作的所有人而言,信号再明确不过:只要提出担忧或试图与外部安全组织合作,即便毫无缘由,你也极有可能成为下一个被解雇的对象。倘若那些最了解潜在风险的人都不敢发声,我们又怎能安全地开发出通用人工智能呢?”

“Unless the employees take a stand now against this kind of maneuver, I am concerned we will not be the last,” Wang said. “The message to everyone still at OpenAI is clear: raise concerns or work closely with outside safety groups, and you could be next, without being told why. You can’t build AGI safely if the people closest to the risks are afraid to speak.”