this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2026
387 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

87184 readers
4186 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Naich@piefed.world 163 points 2 days ago (3 children)

"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.

[–] shittydwarf@piefed.ca 85 points 2 days ago (4 children)

If that were true Musk would have to answer for a lot of CP

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 54 points 2 days ago (1 children)

maybe if the president of the USA weren't a raging child rapist…

[–] Goodeye8@piefed.social 21 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Even then nothing would happen because modern day capitalists are like kings and kings don't get held accountable.

[–] fartographer@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

Only princes do, and only when they're super old and have ruined countless lives. After that, they're sentenced to being treated as royalty while being addressed like a normal: a fate worse than death!

[–] Abyssian@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago

The agents are the user end of things. It's not saying the AI companies are responsible, it's saying whoever used the AI it responsible.

The big companies have too much money to be held responsible for crimes.

That was most likely true even before "AI"!

[–] Korkki@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 days ago

He is rich tho.

[–] Giggles@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago (1 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"

[–] shartgargle@lemmy.zip 7 points 2 days ago (2 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.

[–] BlaestEgnen@feddit.dk 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 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

[–] shartgargle@lemmy.zip 7 points 2 days 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.

[–] Womble@piefed.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 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

[–] shartgargle@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] Womble@piefed.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] shartgargle@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 days 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.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago

Yeah, I was like how is this even a question