Comment by randycupertino

Comment by randycupertino 10 hours ago

24 replies

> In a new class of attack on AI systems, troublemakers can carry out these environmental indirect prompt injection attacks to hijack decision-making processes.

I have a coworker who brags about intentionally cutting off Waymos and robocars when he sees them on the road. He is "anti-clanker" and views it as civil disobedience to rise up against "machines taking over." Some mornings he comes in all hyped up talking about how he cut one off at a stop sign. It's weird.

antinomicus 9 hours ago

This is a legitimate movement in my eyes. I don’t participate, but I see it as valid. This is reminiscent of the Luddite movement - a badly misunderstood movement of folks who were trying to secure labor rights guarantees in the face of automation and new tools threatening to kill large swaths of the workforce.

  • lukeschlather 8 hours ago

    The Luddites were employed by textile manufacturers and destroyed machines to get better bargaining power in labor negotiations. They weren't indiscriminately targeting automation, they targeted machines that directly affected their work.

    • Refreeze5224 7 hours ago

      Which makes the comparison of modern anti-AI proponents (like myself) and Luddites even more apt and accurate.

    • nine_k 7 hours ago

      Destroying someone else's property is much more obviously criminal than cutting off someone else's car, which is not nice, but not destructive.

      • Retric 7 hours ago

        Criminality is an arbitrary benchmark here, cutting people off can be illegal due to the risks involved.

        However what’s more interesting is the deeper social contracts involved. Destroying other people’s stuff can be perfectly legal such as fireman breaking car windows when someone parks in front of a fire hydrant. Destroying automation doesn’t qualify for an exception, but it’s not hard to imagine a different culture choosing to favor the workers.

      • cwillu 6 hours ago

        Dangerous driving is a criminal offense

  • chrsstrm 4 hours ago

    It's easy to see the word Waymo and think clanker autonomous car, but there are very often people inside that car - they are a rideshare service after all. Calling endangering other humans "legitimate" because you dislike the taxi company is not a good look.

  • skybrian 8 hours ago

    How does cutting off a Waymo help with any of that?

    • nine_k 7 hours ago

      The feeling of dominance over machines may be saving that coworker the expense and hassle of another visit to a therapist.

    • theamk 4 hours ago

      Your general luddite argument - preserve way-of-life of the small group at the expense of a larger group.

      In this particular case: for many people, Waymo provides a better service (clean, safer driving, etc..) than Uber or Lyft. This threatens livelihood of human Uber/Lyft drivers. If you sympathize with human Uber/Lyft drivers, and don't care about Waymo users, you want to make Waymo worse, hoping that the people will stop riding Waymo and move to Lyft/Uber instead.

      One way to do so is to make riding in Waymo unpleasant, and it's certainly unpleasant when people are cutting your car off all the time!

      • clort 2 hours ago

        If you are sitting in a waymo vehicle, and somebody cuts you off - do you even notice? They don't have them round here but my idea is that the vehicle itself is doing all the work, you can just continue reading your book, chat or get on something else with little awareness of the actual journey. Does the waymo curse and shake its little fist to alert you it was cut off?

    • BoorishBears 8 hours ago

      I think the important part was telling their coworker ironically: now here we are recognizing their movement

  • stopbulying 7 hours ago

    People are free to reject technology as they please.

    If you deliberately impede the flow of traffic, vehicularly assault, or otherwise sabotage the health and safety of drivers, passengers, and/or pedestrians, what do you deserve?

    If you cause whiplash intentionally, what do you deserve?

    What would be use of equal force in self defense in response to the described attack method?

  • stinkbeetle 6 hours ago

    What exactly do you mean by "legitimate" and "valid"?

    Are movements valid if they have aims that you agree with, or are economic self-interest motivated, and invalid otherwise?

  • bsder 7 hours ago

    Please tell me that he does realize that when something bad happens, that Waymo car has all the footage that it is his fault?

    Something in people's brains often makes them think they are anonymous when they are driving their car. Then that gets disastrously proven otherwise when they need to show up in front of a judge.

bigbadfeline 7 hours ago

These drones have cameras, it's a matter of time before they "share" footage... basically becoming robo-cops, traffic edition - this might be of interest to your coworker.

  • nine_k 7 hours ago

    Most roads already have plenty of cameras registering passing cars, so if you want to travel highly privately, take a bike, which does not require number plates. Also don't forget to wrap your phone in foil (yes, even when turned off), and regularly change your shirt color, or something.

    If you are not that paranoid, you might appreciate the extra camera footage available from passing cars in an event of an accident involving you.

kbaker 7 hours ago

Just tell him that Waymo is now sharing videos of this behavior with auto insurance companies.

I don't know if they are or not. But why wouldn't they...

TedDallas 4 hours ago

On a related note, when the sales and popularity of the automobile really started to take off, some farmers and rural residents would deliberately block roads with wagons and refused to yield right-of-way.