4 ms·

Kind of silly but indicative of modern times. "Everything in my X must have an accountable responsible human Y" should always be the rule. Corporations and Bu

by hgsgm 3y ago

Kind of silly but indicative of modern times. "Everything in my X must have an accountable responsible human Y" should always be the rule. Corporations and Bureaucracy and Computer Systems and Market Capitalism have severely eroded this simple notion. We must not allow people to outsource accountability.

wccrawford 3y ago
I was under the impression that the lawyer was that responsible human, even when other humans are doing the work. It doesn't matter if a clerk fails to get him the right information, they are still the one presenting it at court and so they are still holding the bag for everything, good or ill.
- orangepurple 3y ago
  People ALWAYS try to sidestep accountability; i.e., "He didn't kill him intentionally. The drugs made him do it."
  - drdaeman 3y ago
    Haven't most societies agreed that a crime made under influence is not less - but more severe? Doesn't make people not try to shift the blame, just a weird observation...
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
- tivert 3y ago
  IIRC, they are. Someone in a sister thread made a good point: this action by this judge ups the stakes: instead of it being "Oops, I made a mistake" it becomes "I lied to you and disobeyed you." The sanctions available for the latter are probably much higher.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
drdaeman 3y ago
The "I can't do anything because our computer says so and even though I can't say why that happened that's our final decision" became quite common excuse/accountability waiver, it's good that something is happening to it. I sincerely hope it will become a social norm to frown at such waiver attempts, making them recognized faux pas. It has nothing to do with markets or capitalism, though - only corporate bureaucracies could be blamed. The same things could (and would) have happened in any socioeconomic environment. Computers can be blamed as dreaded black boxes of magic, but don't necessarily have to do anything with the problem, it could be any black box, machine or human, as long as it's deemed untouchable. In this case, though, I honestly believe the correct statement should be "whatever sources or tools I have used, they became my words here so I am fully responsible for everything I've said - all fact checks are on me" rather than "no AI" reactionism.

by hgsgm 3y ago

wccrawford 3y ago

I was under the impression that the lawyer was that responsible human, even when other humans are doing the work. It doesn't matter if a clerk fails to get him the right information, they are still the one presenting it at court and so they are still holding the bag for everything, good or ill.

orangepurple 3y ago
People ALWAYS try to sidestep accountability; i.e., "He didn't kill him intentionally. The drugs made him do it."
- drdaeman 3y ago
  Haven't most societies agreed that a crime made under influence is not less - but more severe? Doesn't make people not try to shift the blame, just a weird observation...
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
tivert 3y ago
IIRC, they are. Someone in a sister thread made a good point: this action by this judge ups the stakes: instead of it being "Oops, I made a mistake" it becomes "I lied to you and disobeyed you." The sanctions available for the latter are probably much higher.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

drdaeman 3y ago

The "I can't do anything because our computer says so and even though I can't say why that happened that's our final decision" became quite common excuse/accountability waiver, it's good that something is happening to it. I sincerely hope it will become a social norm to frown at such waiver attempts, making them recognized faux pas. It has nothing to do with markets or capitalism, though - only corporate bureaucracies could be blamed. The same things could (and would) have happened in any socioeconomic environment. Computers can be blamed as dreaded black boxes of magic, but don't necessarily have to do anything with the problem, it could be any black box, machine or human, as long as it's deemed untouchable. In this case, though, I honestly believe the correct statement should be "whatever sources or tools I have used, they became my words here so I am fully responsible for everything I've said - all fact checks are on me" rather than "no AI" reactionism.