Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Exclusive: IBM researchers easily trick ChatGPT into hacking
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ttown" data-source="post: 4090461" data-attributes="member: 2114"><p>Do we not have product liability on guns and cars? Software put out by companies that haven’t provide adequate testing and safeguards could very well be included IMO.</p><p></p><p>If companies are held libel instead doing product testing on the public you’d see a whole different attitude.</p><p></p><p>As far as laws many computing laws we’re put into place in the 70’s that were very effective when none existEd.</p><p></p><p>We had a phd scientist writing code for a major collaboration between computing research and IBM placed code in the program that slowly added bugs and erased itself if his name was removed from the HR database. Backups became corrupt as they were trying to resolve these issue. It took at least two years to resolve the problem.</p><p></p><p>This is no different IMO, glad I didn’t have to work with a bunch of negative Nancy’s that simply gave up. We were results oriented.</p><p></p><p>As technology advances new laws will be required…..</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ttown, post: 4090461, member: 2114"] Do we not have product liability on guns and cars? Software put out by companies that haven’t provide adequate testing and safeguards could very well be included IMO. If companies are held libel instead doing product testing on the public you’d see a whole different attitude. As far as laws many computing laws we’re put into place in the 70’s that were very effective when none existEd. We had a phd scientist writing code for a major collaboration between computing research and IBM placed code in the program that slowly added bugs and erased itself if his name was removed from the HR database. Backups became corrupt as they were trying to resolve these issue. It took at least two years to resolve the problem. This is no different IMO, glad I didn’t have to work with a bunch of negative Nancy’s that simply gave up. We were results oriented. As technology advances new laws will be required….. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Exclusive: IBM researchers easily trick ChatGPT into hacking
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom