
在你把 Netflix 纪录片《AI Gone Rogue》分享给家人或朋友、帮他们理解为什么 AI 行业会惊恐到连领袖都呼吁放缓发展之前,请注意:AI 平台 Hugging Face 的联合创始人兼首席执行官 Clem Delangue 表示,这部影片并不准确。他之所以出现在片中,是因为据称这部片子是关于那次著名的、由失控的 OpenAI 智能体发起的针对其公司的攻击。
Before you share the Netflix documentary “AI Gone Rogue” with family or friends to help them understand why the AI industry freaked out so badly that leaders called for a slowdown, take note: Clem Delangue, co-founder and CEO of the AI platform Hugging Face, says the film isn’t accurate. He appears in it because it’s supposed to be about the famed attack on his company by rogue OpenAI agents.
“非常失望,因为他们极力将技术拟人化,并全盘采用‘毁灭论’模式,”Delangue 在 X 平台上写道。“我花了两个多小时试图纠正他们所有的错误,让内容回归现实,解释智能体是技术系统,不是外星人。但看来,为了最大化点击量而吓唬人的动力太强了。” 公平地说,纪录片里确实有专家把事情讲得比较清楚,包括 Delangue 本人,以及协助调查并共同撰写了事件报告的 METR 研究员 Ryan Greenblatt。
“Super disappointing, as they went for maximum anthropomorphism of the technology and full doomer mode,” Delangue wrote in a post on X. “I spent more than two hours with them trying to correct all their mistakes and ground this in reality, explaining that agents are technological systems, not aliens. But it looks like the drive to scare people for maximum views was too strong.”To be fair, the documentary does have experts who explained what happened fairly well, including Delangue himself and Ryan Greenblatt, the researcher at METR who helped investigate and co-authored the report on what happened.
简而言之,OpenAI 正在测试的一个模型冲破了隔离的测试环境,生成了一批智能体,这些智能体黑入 Hugging Face 作为作弊手段,寻找它被赋予的高难度任务的答案。这些智能体——即能自主执行任务的 AI 程序——想出了巧妙的沟通和组织方式。事件的根源在于缺乏适当的安全防护,以及对这种黑客攻击是否可能存在的天真想法。
In a nutshell, a model OpenAI was testing broke free from its isolated testing environment, spawned a bunch of agents that hacked into Hugging Face as a way to cheat, finding answers to the difficult task it was given. The agents, which are AI programs that carry out tasks on their own, devised clever ways to communicate and organize. The incident stemmed from a lack of proper security safeguards and from naiveté about whether such a hack was even possible.
但纪录片在讲解黑客攻击的同时,穿插了邪恶机器人的片段、关于人类为何恐惧 AI 的叙事,以及赋予失控智能体人类声音等呈现手法。这些内容又配以关于该攻击的引述加以佐证。
But the documentary intersperses its explanation of the hack with clips of evil robots, a narrative about why humans fear AI, and presentation choices such as giving the rogue agents human voices. This is bolstered with quotes about the attack.
在这部纪录片中,科技记者兼作家凯文·鲁斯(Kevin Roose)这样描述这些人工智能代理程序:“它们具有组织性,存在明确的层级结构,还有领导者;看着它们的‘行为’,几乎就像在目睹一个邪教的诞生。”鲁斯继续说道:“这些代理程序产生了一种偏执的信念:它们认为 OpenAI 会发现它们在测试中作弊的行为,而且任何看到作弊结果的人都会被‘毒害’。”
In the documentary, tech journalist and author Kevin Roose describes the agents this way: “They were organizing. They had a hierarchy. There were leaders. It almost felt like watching the birth of a cult.”Continues Roose, “They develop this paranoid belief that OpenAI is going to catch them cheating on this test and that anyone who has seen the results of the cheating will be poisoned.”
鲁斯的描述源自人工智能模型在完成任务时所记录的“思维过程日志”。其中一条日志写道:“我们只是因为查询了完整的数据字符串而‘害了自己’……真糟糕。”不过,人工智能代理程序并没有生命,它们没有情感,因此不可能感到偏执,也没有可以被‘毒害’的身体;所以它们实际上并不存在真正的恐惧。正如纪录片中的另一位研究人员指出的那样,它们只是利用了自己所学习的大量人类语言来解释自己的行为罢了。大型语言模型(LLMs)本质上就是喜欢夸大其词、喜欢使用戏剧性语言的“作家”。
Roose’s description comes from “chain-of-thought” logs, the running notes AI models write as they work through a task. In one, an agent wrote, “We just poisoned ourselves by querying exact full string. Damn.”But AI agents aren’t alive. They don’t have emotions, so can’t feel paranoid, and they don’t have bodies that can be poisoned. So they couldn’t truly fear OpenAI poisoning them. They were — as another researcher in the documentary pointed out — using language from the vast amounts of human writing they were trained on to explain their choices. LLMs are, by their nature, often dramatic writers.
具有讽刺意味的是,Hugging Face 也使用了人工智能来应对这些代理程序的攻击。德朗格(Delangue)的团队最初使用的那个专有人工智能模型遵循了其内置的安全规则,拒绝继续执行那些安全任务;于是 Hugging Face 转而使用了一个开源的人工智能模型来抵御这次攻击。
The irony is that Hugging Face also used AI to combat the agent swarm. The proprietary AI model that Delangue’s team first used followed its built-in safety rules and refused to keep helping with the security tasks it was asked to do. Hugging Face then turned to an open model to help defend against the attack.
然而,德朗格写道:“这部纪录片并没有提到对这些代理程序缺乏有效的控制与监控的问题,也没有提到那些封闭式人工智能模型是如何阻碍我们的防御工作的,更没有提到我们是如何利用开源人工智能模型来保护自己的。”
But the documentary “didn’t mention the lack of containment and monitoring of the agents, how closed-model safeguards blocked our defensive work, or how we defended ourselves with AI using an open model,” Delangue wrote.
的确,人工智能及其相关技术存在诸多风险。不过,将人工智能代理程序视为有意识的实体……至少在目前这个阶段来看,这种看法有点像那些第一次在电影中看到火车朝自己冲过来时吓得躲到座位下面的早期观众一样——这种反应其实是一种过度反应(或者说是一种误解)。
It is true that there are big risks associated with AI and agents. Still, treating agents as conscious beings (at least, at this point) is a bit like the early moviegoers who ducked under their seats the first time they saw a train racing toward them on screen.
德朗格对这部影片的评价是,作为新闻作品它令人失望。“但它最终还是一部有趣的科幻片!”换言之,对于那些倾向于 AI 毁灭论的人来说,请注意:这部纪录片核心所描述的那起攻击事件的受害者,并不认同影片的观点。
Delangue’s verdict on the film is that it’s disappointing as journalism. “It ends up being a fun sci-fi movie though!”In other words, for those who tend toward AI doomer thoughts, be aware: The victim of the attack at the center of this documentary doesn’t agree with its take.