zlacker

>>jimmin+(OP)
> running it scares the crap out of me

A hundred times this. It's fine until it isn't. And jacking these Claws into shared conversation spaces is quite literally pushing the afterburners to max on simonw's lethal trifecta. A lot of people are going to get burned hard by this. Every blackhat is eyes-on this right now - we're literally giving a drunk robot the keys to everything.

>>popcor+lb
It turns out the lethal trifecta is not so lethal. Should a business avoid hiring employees since technically employees can steal from the cash register. The lethal trifecta is about binary security. Either the data can be taken or it can't. This may be overly cautious. It may be possible that hiring an employee has a positive expected value when when you account for the possibility of one stealing from the cash register.

>>charci+gQ
Employees are humans and therefore subject to the law. There are remedies. And you can point a camera at the cash register.

Who are you going to arrest and/or sue when you run a chat bot "at your own risk" and it shoots you in the foot?

>>naruho+IS
If your chatbot provided you 1.5 feet worth of value before shooting your foot it may have been worth it. The optimal self damage to maximize total value may be non 0.

>>charci+oT
>The optimal self damage to maximize total value may be non 0.

This is the calculus that large companies use all the time when committing acts that are 'most likely' illegal. While they may be fined million of dollars they at least believe they'll make 10s to 100s of millions on said action.

Now, for you as an individual things are far more risky.

You don't have a nest of heathen lawyers to keep you out of trouble.

You can't bully nation states, government entities, or even other large companies.

You individually may be held civilly or criminally liable if things go bad enough.

>>pixl97+0u2
It's not that deep. Most people are not having their agents break the law for them.