After Australia’s first reported automated hacking accident, experts warn deployers – and possibly developers – of AI agents could be held liable for the actions of their bots
  • shartgargle@lemmy.zipEnglish
    31·
    11 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.dkEnglish
      5·
      10 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

      • shartgargle@lemmy.zipEnglish
        2·
        10 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.worldEnglish
      3·
      10 days ago

      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