392
AI agents aren’t legally responsible for any harm that they cause, experts say. So who is? (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 3 weeks 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
[–] 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

So basically use it as a toy for entertainment purposes only... Except it's not marketed to be used that way and far to many people aren't smart or educated in computing enough to use it that way. Accepting a bash command you don't understand is the same as running a bash command you found on the Internet... You shouldnt, but people are far more trusting of the stuff an LLM powered agent comes up with.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago*

    No, not at all, and I’m not sure how that could be the conclusion you came to from my post.

    AI should never be touching prod systems without extreme safeguards/permissions set by the systems that they are accessing. Give it a read only db user account. Give it write access to some tables, but no delete/truncate. No AI should be able to run bash commands on production systems by itself without proper safeguards. That’s a failure of the users if it can.

    Systems and software that was built by AI are fine to go into production environments after they’ve done through the regular pipeline of local testing, peer review, QA, unit tests, integration tests, test environment, stage environment, etc.

    You never just give AI unfettered access to production systems to do whatever it wants, just like you don’t give a junior dev that access. People that aren’t “smart or educated enough” won’t have that access either - and again, if they do that’s a gigantic failure by the people that are.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent