That's exactly the way it should be. I don't get to program a computer to steal money, then blame the computer for the stolen money.

HOWEVER, I couldn't help but notice this part:

“If someone tells a tool to do something, and the tool does it, I don’t think we would say, ’Oh, what do we do about the tool?’”

and think of gun control.

Guns are tools; they don't do anything they aren't told to do. And yet, when someone tells a gun to shoot another person, we do say, "Oh, what can we do about the tool?" and the answer is usually "ban it." Why?

If this line of thinking is so obvious when it comes to AI, why is it the opposite when it comes to guns?

I don't get to say, "That crazy gun just broke loose, went off the rails all by itself and shot somebody." We all understand the gun didn't do anything, the shooter did. Thus, solutions should focus on the shooter, not the gun.

Violence is the problem, not the tool used to do it. Treat the underlying causes of violence: poverty, homelessness, unemployment, drug addiction, and mental health, if you want to solve the violence problem.