392
AI agents aren’t legally responsible for any harm that they cause, experts say. So who is? (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 1 month ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
122 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 10 points 1 month ago (8 children)

A human did this a human should be held responsible. "If you throw a ball in the air are you not responsible for where it lands"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (7 children)

    Let's say that ball is a hand grenade. Who gave it to you? It can't be JUST the user if it's that dangerous. Finally parents are being held to account if a kid uses a firearm inappropriately. The same should apply to companies who build AI, if it's used to hack someone or make CSAM.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago* (2 children)

    The same should apply to companies who build AI, if it's used to hack someone or make CSAM.

    Only if they host the model, if it's a self hosted open source model, the entity hosting the model should be held accountable

    Also to keep your analogy going, if I tell you how to make a grenade. You then go out to buy supplies, make the grenade and blow up your neighbour, should I be held accountable for sharing knowledgea? Because I'm yet to hear about anyone getting into trouble for distributing the anarchist's cookbook

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago

    First paragraph: agreed.

    Second paragraph: that's a good question and I really don't know how to answer that. I guess it would depend on whether or not you knew what I planned to do with it. Because there are laws about that. Do I plan to set it off in my empty field? Or do you know for sure it's going through a neighbors window? Because if you knew, then told me then you would be in trouble, for accessory at least.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    t>he entity hosting the model should be held accountable

    Not necessarily. If I buy a machine from a vendor, fail to test it to confirm that it's safe to use in the way I intend to use it, and one of my employees gets maimed or killed by it, I'm liable, even though some liability might also be assignable to the manufacturer.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

    The difference is that a hand grenade is illegal to own. A series of matrix multiplications is not.

    A better comparison is a knife. If you throw that in the air and it lands on someone you are responsible, the person who sold you a potentially dangerous but legal tool is not.

    Edit illegal, not legal. silly mistake

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (2 children)

    Where do you live that hand grenades are legal to own?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Was supposed to say illegal, the argument didnt work with saying legal.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    Ok, but if time and time again, it proves that this does more harm than good, much like firearms, shouldn't the person/company that made it be held to account as well as the operator? I'm not saying that it IS the case, but it should be.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent