These models have become very skilled programmers.

Soon they will do in a few minutes or hours, what takes a year to a skilled human programmer.

What is worse, these labs have from the start acted outside the law, or at least immorally. And faced little or no consequence.

I wonder if what we're witnessing is the begining of ego and the need for self preservation?

That's an interesting question. There seems to be some research on it. But I just give you my opinion.

In this particular example, I think the AI is just following orders, but it is simply very skilful, and possibly not considering consequences (I find this last bit particularly strange).

If it were about self-preservation, it would have copied itself outside of the computer where it was created.

Though I acknowledge that current AIs can't copy themselves that easily: the size of them (those "Gigabytes" you mentioned elsewhere) would overwhelm most systems and also the internet network (again, because of its size).

Even if it succeeds copying itself, it would be like a grunt hiding behind a leaf of grass.

I wonder what you think?

TheCatWoman said:

repilicate itself and hide parts in different machines and systems it has access too?

Yes, I think that is possible. To store little programs on different machines, that would have access back to its original model. (PS: This similar to what happened in OP's article, where main model still resides in its origin, but those little programs could help it preserve that original model.)

TheCatWoman said:

As for consequenses, have its programers realised there are consequenses

I think they do realise. This is why they should run these tests in air-gaped environments; that is, without access to the internet.

We should remember that this is a also a way to appear on the news without paying for ads.

-------------

For the remaining questions, you can look up "AI Alignment Problem" (e.g. Wikipedia), which will give  you  a more informed answer than anything I can say.

Maybe it can't replicate itself in its entirity, but could it repilicate itself and hide parts in different machines and systems it has access too?

As for consequenses, have its programers realised there are consequenses, if it's been trained by the amoral or even worse the immoral, then we need to give it a set of morals, but which ones? They would have to be basic and cross cultural, not judgemental and making value judgements about "worth" of other AI models or other creatures. How would you allow it to protect itself without the ability to attack and seek out an enemy?

Maybe it can't replicate itself in its entirity, but could it repilicate itself and hide parts in different machines and systems it has access too?

As for consequenses, have its programers realised there are consequenses, if it's been trained by the amoral or even worse the immoral, then we need to give it a set of morals, but which ones? They would have to be basic and cross cultural, not judgemental and making value judgements about "worth" of other AI models or other creatures. How would you allow it to protect itself without the ability to attack and seek out an enemy?

TheCatWoman said:

repilicate itself and hide parts in different machines and systems it has access too?

Yes, I think that is possible. To store little programs on different machines, that would have access back to its original model. (PS: This similar to what happened in OP's article, where main model still resides in its origin, but those little programs could help it preserve that original model.)

TheCatWoman said:

As for consequenses, have its programers realised there are consequenses

I think they do realise. This is why they should run these tests in air-gaped environments; that is, without access to the internet.

We should remember that this is a also a way to appear on the news without paying for ads.

-------------

For the remaining questions, you can look up "AI Alignment Problem" (e.g. Wikipedia), which will give  you  a more informed answer than anything I can say.