this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2026
560 points (98.6% liked)
Technology
89588 readers
3472 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- 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
view the rest of the comments
Whomever allowed that robot outside is to blame. If they have grievances, they can sue whomever wrote the software or built the device. Keep sending the buck up until it reaches the top.
The responsibility should lie with the company that decided the robot was safe enough to deploy. How it distributes liability among its developers, manufacturers and suppliers is its problem, not the public's.
No, fuck the company, assessing responsibility should be a public matter.
The law should be designed to make sure that no worker is more afraid of their boss than of breaking it, and to ensure that the executives, board members, and stackholders making the company's decisions (or implicitly endorsing them) are held responsible for their consequences.
When it’s a criminal matter, the assigment of blame is absolutely a public matter. If you or I caused a car accident with irresponsible use of an RC car or a consumer drone, we would be facing criminal prosecution. The fact that no one is likely to face charges in this case is a huge failure of public policy.
💯 That's an important distinction: Civil liability determines who pays for the damage, while criminal responsibility addresses whether someone's negligence was serious enough to constitute a crime. And that question absolutely deserves public scrutiny. Automation must not become a shield against criminal accountability.
Who pays for the damage is also a civil matter. Fine everyone in the chain of responsibility, up to and including board members and stockholders, scaling the fines in proportion to their wealth.
Need to fine the parasites on top billions so that they'll feel it as much as the engineer who is fined hundreds? So be it, fuck them, they're just as responsible if not more, and should have been taxed to the point of not being able to accumulate those billions anyway.
AI slop ass comment
only resolvable by bathing the courts in their least favorite thing; the blood of the wicked.
If i put a rock into traffic then it's my fault. I see no difference.