3 ms·
The question is if you accept that a machine can take blame. If it cant, you cant diffuse responsibility even to a million machines
by return0 10y ago
The question is if you accept that a machine can take blame. If it cant, you cant diffuse responsibility even to a million machines
- yourapostasy 10y agoIt isn't necessary in today's legal and regulatory climate the world over to resolve the question of acceptance that a machine can take legal blame. We already have structures in place that enable practical financial and operational control while at the same time effectively deflecting away blame through factoring and diffusing responsibility. Nearly all of the 0.1% wealthy's forms of tax efficiency schemes absolutely depend upon this principle. There are any number of tax planners that will be happy to talk details with you about the starter kit versions of these schemes for a five-figure entry fee, and every single one of the substantive vehicles I investigated depended upon this principle. These same vehicles can be used by machines that own enterprises. They might not be on the masthead/letterhead of the enterprise, but that hardly matters unless a currently-unknown prerequisite to AGI or AI sufficient to run an an enterprise is the machine equivalent of a childish human ego.