• LilBobbyTables@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    20 days ago

    The people who use it to do things, obviously. Just like how cameras aren’t responsible for the photos that are taken with them, photoshop isn’t responsible for the images made with it, and knives aren’t responsible for the things that they cut, AI isn’t responsible for the stuff it outputs - the person controlling it is.

  • Untamed_Star@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 days ago

    The owners or company should be. an AI isn’t even a person or consious the creators created the “evil” it did too. but they are rich so no one ig lol.

  • fubarx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 days ago

    You rolled a bowling ball down a hill. It struck a few cars on the way and went through a house and killed their pet. Guess who would be held responsible? You or the bowling ball manufacturer?

    What if the bowling ball was really shiny and worth $100B? Should it make a difference?

    • MalReynolds@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 days ago

      What if you bowl your ball normally down the lane and of its own initiative it goes and hacks a website?

        • MalReynolds@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          20 days ago

          Really? I’m inclined to blame that on the manufacturer. If ‘AI’ guardrails fail that spectacularly, it’s on the provider. I fail to see any way to blame society, other than perhaps not voting in more sanity, but that’s pretty indirect.

          • SparroHawc@piefed.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            20 days ago

            As the person who deployed the agent, you are responsible for what it does on your behalf. You stand to gain from its actions, you also stand to lose from its bad behavior.

            Of course, if the company that provided you the agent knowingly misrepresented the product, you can seek damages for what the agent did - but that’s up to you (and good luck getting damages from trillion-dollar tech companies and their armies of lawyers).

  • green_link@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    19 days ago

    “A computer can never be held accountable, therefore a computer must never make a management decision” so the owners are accountable then.

    • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      19 days ago

      management will never take accountability for it’s own decisions.

      that’s how you become an excellent manager who climbs the ladder.

      if you take accountability you get fired.

      • phutatorius@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        15 days ago

        management will never take accountability for it’s own decisions.

        They’ll only do it if forced. That’s what the law is for.

  • Naich@piefed.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 days ago

    “The law is clear, says Prof Jeannie Paterson. “If I deploy an AI agent and it causes harm to someone else, I am responsible for that harm.”

    In case you were wondering if it wasn’t the bleeding obvious.

    • Giggles@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 days ago

      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”

      • shartgargle@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        20 days ago

        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.

        • BlaestEgnen@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          20 days ago

          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