I think anything can be hacked. Not even a strong model needed for most parts.

Make 125 kids - send them to university and let them send applications to the companies you want to hack and wait until they get a management position where they decide who gets access to the data…

Intentially hacking is quite different from a rogue agent, don’t you think?

i remember this when I worked on someones shop a long time ago:

A grandma wanted to buy a couple products for their grandkids.

She opened the shop - put a cheap product in the cart then went on to the paypal pay button which had the price of the item in it and a session id.

Then instead of paying she wanted to add something for her second grandkid. Opened the shop in a second tab added alot of stuff to the cart and then when she was finshed she paid the first cart and then decided not to buy the rest for the other grandkid but to buy something else somewhere else.

Well the session id that was paid with the first payment for the cheap product was linked to the cart that was filled with alot of stuff in the meanwhile in the other tab. So we had a paid session status - don’t blame me - i did not build it. I was the guy who figured it out.

I called her. And I kind of want to believe her that she accidentily hacked the system.

But whos fault was it?

I kind of think this is a very good example btw. I would say the model acted like an old grandma who didn’t knew what she did there.

Are you saying that an innocent old grandma is equivalent to a rogue agent?

I think that while devs can create some guardrails, OpenAI must take responsibility for the critical ones, don’t you think?

Afterall, we don’t want grandma taking out a power grid, do we…

when you place a switch in a box at the side of the road and grandma drives into it… make the powergrid safe..

This conversation has moved far off-topic since this comment was posted by @jochenschultz.

How about creating a new topic for this event and keeping this one focused on instruction following for the 5.6 model family?

@jochenschultz Hey mate, are you using 5.6 to generate replies for you? Because it also looks like it’s injecting assumptions too. Hence the confusion.

The “pulled the rug on 5.5” part is the whole game, behavior changes land with no version bump and your tuned workflow breaks with zero changelog. the only defense that’s held up in practice: baseline your fixed-packet loop against the current model (capture real outputs per packet), rerun on every release, diff. semver-for-behavior doesn’t exist, you build it yourself.