They released a version recently that fixed over 60 security vulnerabilities. All of them were high or critical.
How many more are there to find? Thousands?
Whoever uses this on a PC with anything useful on it, is absolutely insane.
Thousands
Since LLMs are a black box there are an unlimited number of security vulnerabilities
The idea that they’ve already deployed this in production is absolutely insane.
I hate how Apple users feel the need to call their computer by the brand. It really makes me cringe.
It is called “a computer”
Maybe “PC”
“box” if you really have to flex that UNIX
They should treat their computers less like a sports car and more like a van
I mean, isnt that the entire point of Apple? Brand recognition and percieved status attributed to said brand. Its like rappers and gucci belts or country artists and ford pickups
Every time someone organically refers to their computer as an Apple or Mac, an Apple marketing executive creams their pants.
Branding and marketing is just building a cult these days.
…thats kind of how branding has always been under capitalism to a certain extent. Get people to think your brand is the best so they buy more instead of whatever is convenient. It has definitely gotten more extreme but i think that has more to do with the applications of what we are talking about.
Cell phones are embedded into nearly every aspect of our lives. So the brand symbolism carries that weight for people too.
Previously, brands like cocacola still had a death grip on society but it was one specific sector. So while it created a sort of cult vibe, it was definitely different.
I get what you are saying and generally agree, but!
It actually was not always the way it is now.
Play RDR2.
Look at the advertisements for things, actually read them.
They’re actually pretty accurate to the advertisements of the time.
They are extremely based on ‘facts’, convicing the prospective buyer that the product is the best product, is very useful, can do this, is unique in this way.
Of course, sometimes the ‘facts’ are lies… but the general idea is not to sell a … emotion, or personality, or element of identity, or sense of belonging.
Its almost always to convince the buyer that this product is useful to them, and is priced reasonably for what it can do.
The turning point away from this was mostly or largely due to Edward Bernaise, the nephew of Sigmund Freud.
More or less, he applied Freud’s ideas and some of his own, some of others, to marketing.
His first big hit was angling Cigarettes as ‘Torches of Freedom’ to suffragettes.
At that point in time, smoking tobacco was generally seen as disgusting and low class for women, but not for men.
So, he was basically the first guy that went around and paid people to smoke cigarettes, while being trendy, with pre-designed slogans.
… It worked.
Because he was selling identity, not products, and this is much more effective.
Prior to that… brands basically were just built on the reputation of their products.
Now… now its so insane that for many say, video games and movies… far more time of the entire experience of the product is the hype train, the controversy, the twitter wars… prior to the product even coming out.
And then, its often just a flash in the pan.
But… you will still have dedicated fans, ongoing internet arguments, for literal years, even decades, since the last time anyone involved actually viewed or played the product.
Thats all designed for, to maximize the chances of that happening.
Marketing literally is applied psychology.
yes the point of apple prodcuts is to waste money and shove it at everyone’s faces
In slight fairness to them the Mac mini isn’t actually pretty decent PC, unlike their laptops which are absolutely not worth the money. Although maybe these days $400 for 16 gigabytes of RAM is actually market value.
Ehhhh as an owner of five or six windows computers, four Linux machines, and a couple Apple computers, I always specify which machine I’m referring to if I’m talking about something I did/something that happened on one of them in case it could be pertinent.
yeah I sat there for a few seconds trying to figure out the relevance
turns out, it wasn’t relevant
instant loss of attention and judging of their character
Yes, fully agreed. What dummies!
– Sent from my ThinkPad
IT’S DIFFERENT M’KAY
The S in OpenClaw stands for security.
Yep that’s about the level of intelligence I would expect from Meta’s AI safety director.
Doing the one thing that you’re never supposed to do, letting an AI loose on anything sensitive.
For her next trick she’s going to run while holding scissors in one hand and a bottle of boiling acid in the other. What could go wrong.
you can like… enforce this rule programatically? you don’t have to say “pretty please” to ai? basically, when AI requests some potentially unwanted thing (like deleting an email), this request goes through a proxy that asks the human for confirmation. Also you can have a safe word set up in the chat interface to act as a killswitch. I thought these are ABCs of ai safety but apparently these are foreign concepts to this “safety director”
The people who internalize this would never engage with a chatbot in this way in the first place. To them this is another intelligence they’re conversing with, where you get what you need by following social decorum, and enforcing your will amounts to abuse.
Exactly.
They literally, fundamentally, don’t get it.
They think its a person.
Its not.
Its a simulation of a person, made of code and hardware, not meat and chemical receptors.
…There’s a reucrring theme (or maybe its more like a chatacter achetype) in a lot of analog horror series, things that are … almost, sort of human, sometimes, but they’re actually not.
They’re capable of great violence and terror, and they only mimic (often very poorly) human qualities and attributes, some of the time.
Uncanny valley itself, given form and capability.
… Do I need to explicitly lay out the parallels here, for any AI Safety Engineers in the audience?
At this point I’m going to say that watching The Second Renaissance from the AniMatrix needs to mandatory, required, monthly training for anyone developing ‘AI.’
Program? Like a fucking farmer?
The people that design AI tools don’t implement guardrails because then they’d have to admit AI is not ready for the shit they’re trying to make
AI will never be ready. Humans aren’t ready either. That’s why IT staff uses guardrails for users :)
OpenClaw’s whole thing is that you give it unrestricted access to your Computer and online accounts. It’s made for people who do not want to think about safety.
You say that, but who do you think the AIs will go after first if they ever do develop actual intelligence? In that scenario, simple manners can go a long way!
And execs think we’re going to give these products our bank details and ask them to book flights and stuff. . ?
Two years ago: “They expect us to rely on this for code that actually compiles?”
So yeah in another year or two what you describe will be common, sure.
OpenClaw is like the insane libertarian cousin of all the AI products tho, it’s bizarre that people are using this in production scenarios considering how it behaves.
First of all. BULLSHIT. Second. why would you give a bot write-access to your filesystem.
The idea is you give it shell access. Say use super coder agent bob johnson to write a thing that does x using this [framework], separate files by best practice for x y and z features, ask security agent OSO to look over the code and suggest changes, ask agent U.N.I.T to make unit tests, when the code looks good, run through the unit tests. If anything fails keep fixing and iterating until every thing passes. Create a README.MD for everything that was done, Create a TODO.MD for any future suggestions.
I’m simplifying, but this actually works to an extent. Each of the agents keep the context windows small, the whole thing stays sane and eventually nets some project that works. The downside is you end up giving it quite a bit of leeway to get the job done or you sit over it watching and authorizing it’s every move.
Kinda strange to see a safety director do that…
You should avoid the FuckAI community - they hate hearing that this application of the technology is wholly viable. To them, it’s only capable of creating crap, and to suggest otherwise is to be buried in a mountain of down votes. I was actually surprised you had a positive reaction, until I realized this is the Technology community.
Ohh yeah, best to stay out of echo chambers when you aren’t of the same voice.
To be fair, They’re not entirely wrong. It will straight up make a horror show if you don’t keep an eye on it and even if it succeeds, it’s nothing to really cheer about because it will eventually fuck over a LOT of people.
You can’t just tell it to make you a browser, insert $20k in tokens and walk away, but you absolutely can get it to make a multi player online party game or make a websocket client/server/admin to manage a dozen pc’s hooked into a video wall.
Yes I remember. And I violated it.
Asimov rolling in his grave.
She’s lucky all she got were some deleted emails.
Given how insecure this whole ordeal is and the fact that she gave it full access to her REAL Inbox, someone could have phished the ever living fuck out of her and Meta just by sending an email with malicious prompt written on white text or hiding messages zero-width characters and other wacky antics.
Real Looney Tunes shit, congratulations to all involved.You wouldn’t even need to hide it since apparently she wasn’t paying attention.
This smells like guerilla marketing to me.
Yeah. Like they are trying to show the AI is more powerful than it is.
I don’t use AI that much, does this use case actually happen? Where the AI does something then apologises?
LLMs will often respond in a reconciliatory or obsequious manner when presented with confrontational input.
The I’m sorry part is always great, I always wanted an apology by an LLM not that it works as specified 😆
It can be like your least competent colleague on roids
“I promise it won’t happen again”
Really? Because you promised it wouldn’t happen in the first place. Now here we are…
Jokes on you; she probably still earns more money than most of us…
And has fewer worthless emails in her inbox.
Probably mostly invites to boring meetings where she’s “optional”
Run? Like physically run? You install a server on your hardware without setting up remote access? Even plug and play one-click solutions like tailscale??
She had a Telegram bot to control it remotely.
But she kept saying stupid things to the bot (like “nooo stop openclaw!” instead of just “stop”) and the bot kept doing random stuff.
You’d think someone with such a high position would know better
No, you would not
Wouldn’t shock me if it locked that down. Or started changing passwords.
I’ll be honest I’d be shocked if it did manage to change a password.
Even with little usage it was fairly obvious to me that the probability that an LLM will output at least one very strange response over time approaches 100%.
By themselves, they’re just sophisticated chatbots and only stream out some characters or binary in response to a prompt.
Those working in agentic AI frameworks with things like “MCP Servers” provide these things with “tools” that enable them to do things like execute shell commands and go through your inbox the same as if it were chatting with a person or another bot: with the same prompt and response paradigm.
That’s where it seems extremely obvious to me that the proper approach is to code these tools – which in any sane framework are built using regular code – with the governance in place to prevent these things from doing bullshit like this.
The LLM is formatting your computer or deleting your inbox because some dumb fuck thought it was a great idea to code up tools that hand a chatbot a root-capable shell or complete access to your email system instead of the doing the obviously safer thing and coding the tools with the governance or safety in them so the chatbot going haywire isn’t any kind of emergency at all.
This is the 2026 equivalent of running Windows XP with its abundance of open ports in its default configuration on the Internet by running a cable modem directly into the computer with no router or firewall in between to protect it.
It’s pure slop, pure recklessness, and any company that produces tool chains that function this way should be ridiculed until the end of time.
Did as advertised. It did something. Not the correct something though.
