Post #4853220 · Elektrine

2026-09-26 07:25 UTC

Complex software behaving in unexpected and sometimes harmful ways has been a persistent problem since software was invented. The phenomenon used to be called “bugs” or “defects”, but I guess “going rogue” sounds cooler. It also implicitly frames “rogue” behavior as some kind of inexplicable exception, as if software is somehow usually trustworthy. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/25/technology/openais-ai-us-government-websites.html?unlocked_article_code=1.EFE.RfLT.x6YBjHa1PMz6

Replies (3)

@jaark@infosec.exchange 2026-09-26 07:33

@mattblaze@federate.social I totally agree, one of the biggest and most successful bits of the lol marketing scan is the choice of terms indicating intelligence or some kind of life in the machine. it's not even a bug, LLMs are intentionally non-deterministic and so random outputs should be expected. If sometime shoots a gun into the air and accidentally killed someone, the bullet didn't 'go rogue'. The shooter should be prosecuted. Same principal applies here imo.

Open ##4853219
@mattblaze@federate.social 2026-09-26 07:32

“Our software went rogue!” No. You programmed it wrong.

Open ##4853767
@gooba42@mastodon.social 2026-09-26 16:22

@mattblaze@federate.social Any complex project has the capacity to run off the rails. "Going rogue" is a reasonable colloquial descriptive phrase even an engineer might use in passing. It isn't meant to imply the project has a will of its own, only that it's no longer performing the expected purpose. It's only in the era of fake AGI that we suddenly have to be so extremely careful with our wording. The general public has been conditioned to think this is all magic and demonology.

Open ##4859767