> Whoever built, configured, or authorized the system is ultimately responsible... That shouldn't change just because the control policy is more complicated. A

> Whoever built, configured, or authorized the system is ultimately responsible... That shouldn't change just because the control policy is more complicated. A poetic sentiment, but does not hold in reality. Anyone who has spent more than ten minutes being a square peg in a round hole can surely recall their frustration when a bureaucrat is refusing to do the common-sense thing, because The Computer is telling them something that is complete and utter nonsense. Once The Computer is part of any human process, its decisions, be they inscrutable, insane, or simply stupid are not to be questioned. The line drone that is using The Computer has no agency to countermand it, the line drone's manager has no agency in rebuilding, or re-configuring it, and the executive that authorized the system will never even be made aware of the problem. These problems exist when The Computer is simply executing the rules the programmer fed it, and will persist in the same way when The Computer is executing an inscrutable neural network. Except it'll be worse, because neural networks are capable of executing even more tasks poorly. ----- In theory you are responsible for, and control the heating element, but in practice, we're the society from Idiocracy that cooks everything by sticking it into the microwave, and pressing the 'Popcorn' button on it. I'm much of a mind that Frank Herbert's thought experiment had the right doctrinal approach to the question of artificial intelligence. Thou Shalt Not Make A Machine In The Likeness Of A Human Mind.