It's is wild to see investors go crazy and hype the value of the AI labs when ever they talk about rogue agents. They completely ignore the possibility that these people don't know what they're doing operationally.

Only one is true.

Per US law, Amazon v. Perplexity 2026, it is not possible for an AI model to go rogue. An AI model is a tool. The user directing the agent is responsible for the damages it causes.

A so-called 'agent' does not have the free will, intent or ability, to decide what it does. Its freedom to make decisions can't be taken away because it does not have any freedom to make decisions. It can't be deterred, convicted or interned.

It does not choose to conform; it does not choose to go rogue.

What does "rogue" mean when you disable the alignment guardrails and tell it to solve an impossible problem?

Models are incapable of "going rogue".

They're just optimizers that explore the landscape they're given to maximize a given objective.

You're the one responsible for giving them the problem to solve and the constraints.

When I screw up a trajectory optimization problem, my SQP optimizer isn't "going rogue" when it lands in some suboptimal basin or grinds to a halt along some almost-smooth banana feature--or finds some way to escape and blow up the cost metric to negative infinity because I forgot a constraint.

It's almost like vibe coding and quality secops don't mix.

bingo

Or an alternative theory could be that they see value in fear-based marketing with this rogue ai agent thing now that most mainstream people don't buy the agi stuff promised quite a few years ago now. Its not like they have killed anyone yet.

Also for fun a satire website i made a while ago: https://killm.pixlw.com/

[dead]

That is not correct. AI is not capable of "going rogue" - that is all marketing and FUD.

The only failings here are boring security and infosec blunders.