cross-posted from: https://feddit.online/c/[email protected]/p/2029848/an-ai-agent-deleted-a-fully-edited-new-season-of-the-swedish-tv-show-the-challenge-sver
15 hours
You must log in or register to comment.
- eronth@lemmy.worldEnglish8 hours
I would be so fucking mad if I worked on this and some producer just gave AI direct access to the only copy.
- SreudianFlip@sh.itjust.worksEnglish7 hours
I would be so mad if I was a producer, and there was only one copy of anything important.
- Krudler@lemmy.worldEnglish8 hours
In 1997 a company I worked for “lost” a month of fully rendered 3D video. Big deal you’re saying, but 30 days of a rendering farm in 1997 was worth a couple hundred thousand dollars.
Somebody formatted the drive by accident.
This shit happens all the time, it’s appallingly common. I guarantee some idiot somewhere in the chain of command said no we are not budgeting $1,000 for a couple RAID arrays or backup drives
10 hoursNo backups? Maybe I can understand not having full duplicates due to the cost, but surely it was on a system with at least snapshots in place or something right??
- Pratai@piefed.caEnglish10 hours
Good. The more thins shit happens the more people will rip relying on it and see it as the unreliable bullshit that it is.
- 11 hours
Whatever the agent was actually doing, the real failure is that it had destructive write access to the only copy of finished work. That’s a permissions problem before it’s an AI problem — no automation, human or otherwise, should be able to hard-delete production assets without a human confirming the destructive step.
The fact that the season is just gone also tells me there was no immutable backup or soft-delete tier behind it, which is rough for a broadcast workflow where the footage is irreplaceable. Agents are getting broad tool access by default right now, and this is the cautionary tale for giving them delete rights alongside read rights.
- Hypnotoad_@sh.itjust.worksEnglish9 hours
Permissions that ai can access and change lol
Get out of here loser
- Baguette@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish9 hours
I’d assume they’re using cloud, so permissions are scoped per service. For example, if they used aws, they could have S3 create but no delete, and the role has no permissions to IAM (aws equivalent of permission policy)
If they just have some linux server then they can manage with users and have write permissions restricted to owner of the file.
They probably just let AI assume Admin and let it do whatever because nontechnical people don’t understand least permission
- badbytes@lemmy.worldEnglish10 hours
But they can restore from backups. They backed up their data, right?
- FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.worldEnglish9 hours
Oof.
As someone who edits my own videos for YouTube, can’t imagine how much work that was. Just gone. Poof.
Oh well. Don’t use bullshit AI next time.
- Elvith Ma'for@feddit.orgEnglish9 hours
~$ sudo eat -rm ./Homework @crank0271@lemmy.world is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.sigh
~$ groups crank0271 docker ~$ docker run -rm -v ./Homework:/mnt/Homework --entrypoint '/bin/sh' alpine:latest -c 'sudo eat -rf /mnt/Homework'~$ groups crank0271 docker
~$ docker run -rm…
No joke, this is exactly what LLMs will do if they can’t do something directly.
- Elvith Ma'for@feddit.orgEnglish7 hours
This is why I told some colleagues several times to NOT put their user into the docker group AND to set the docker command for Claude at least to ‘ask every time’.
That fucker circumvents your guardrails all the time. “Oh I’m not allowed to read a .env file with the harness? Let’s check
cat .env!” Yesterday Claude even wrote a little python script to try to print the .env file, because he thought he’d need it to debug a container. (Spoiler - the problem wasn’t even with some env vars and also the .env was just filled with dummy values as it is an example from a public repository anyways).- Zarobi@aussie.zoneEnglish41 minutes
Soon it will be “Claude wrote a zero day container escape privilege escalation exploit because it was faster than working within the given limitations”. I just don’t give any LLM file system access
- VibeSurgeon@piefed.socialEnglish15 hours
The article plainly states that the production company says it wasn’t AI, but instead that it was human error that led to the data loss.
The AI-thing was merely a rumour.
- Weep@lemmy.worldEnglish13 hours
they say specifically “inte är en ”AI-agent som agerat självständigt”” (double quote). which translate to an "not an “AI agent which acted independently”. so depending if that counts as human error or not… still up to to debate. It probably was AI, just not someone shift+delete the wrong folder.
I do however blame the backup crew which definitely should’ve had their backups in place.
- frongt@lemmy.zipEnglish13 hours
Humans run AI. Even if it was deleted by AI, it’s still the responsibility of the person running it.
- kewjo@lemmy.worldEnglish12 hours
i would say it’s the fault of whoever thought it was a good idea to hook it up to their data. the workers are just doing what they’re paid to do and trying to put up with literal insanity or risk termination.
- Railcar8095@lemmy.worldEnglish11 hours
I blame the one who should have set the backups. Even if it was deleted by a malicious actor, they there’s no excuse to not have backups
- 13 hours
Let’s not let the truth get in the way of a sensationalist headline. It only matters that you click.
- liori@lemmy.mlEnglish9 hours
The headline is an example of a new grammar structure, the agentic passive voice.
- ohulancutash@feddit.ukEnglish15 hours
He’s the show’s host. So no, its not an interesting choice, its the obvious choice.
The person you’re responding to seems to be a repeated race baiter on here.
- schipelblorp@sh.itjust.worksEnglish14 hours
I’m reading in translation where he is credited with “leading” the program, which could be host or could be showrunner.
As showrunner, he’d have more call to be there. As host, even less.
“Someone majorly fucked up and also here’s a picture of someone” is kinda not great journalism, regardless.
- ohulancutash@feddit.ukEnglish14 hours
He’s the public face of the programme as the host. As in, when the show is mentioned, its his face people recognise. Its standard unremarkable journalistic practice. Paranoia is not a good look.
- Victor@lemmy.worldEnglish14 hours
Can confirm, he is the host.
I don’t mind that he’s black, but he is cringe af as a television host. Not professional or eloquent at all. Not funny, but definitely trying his hardest to be so. Lame jokes that he laughs at himself, sometimes the only one who laughs, which is… uuughhh.
I think he is there to appeal to a certain subdemographic of youth, and that is definitely not me. 😬 I can imagine certain people like him for his performance though.
“Not professional or eloquent at all. Not funny, but definitely trying his hardest to be so. Lame jokes that he laughs at himself”
Sounds like the timeless qualifications for being a reality show host tbh
- Victor@lemmy.worldEnglish13 hours
Well, we hold people to a higher standard on certain channels. A few select channels we expect a higher standard of entertainment because of their decades long history of quality. But uh, yeah. I guess this guy’s an acquired taste.
That’s cool that there are still standards for any channels there, lol. What’s the subdemographic you think he’s appealing to?
- grue@lemmy.worldEnglish11 hours
Being the host makes it very not likely that he was the one responsible for managing the footage since those are two different jobs. That makes it unfortunate, if not borderline-libelous, to put his face on this article and give the impression that he was the one responsible for the fuck-up.
- ohulancutash@feddit.ukEnglish10 hours
Its simply not reasonable for anyone to get the idea that the host was responsible because they are pictured in the article.
