3 ms·

> there's such a thing in legal terms as a reckless disregard for the consequences Lots of tools can be dangerous if misused. We hold the people who misuse the

by pdonis 3y ago

> there's such a thing in legal terms as a reckless disregard for the consequences Lots of tools can be dangerous if misused. We hold the people who misuse the tools responsible, not the people who made the tools. Why would AI be any different?

SketchySeaBeast 3y ago
That's not true in all situations, is it? If someone constructs something dangerous like an explosive and then hand it off for someone else's use they'd be culpable as well, wouldn't they?
- JohnFen 3y ago
  It all depends. If I sell bottles of arsenic for the purpose of killing rats, I won't be held culpable if someone uses it for murder. If I sell bottles of arsenic for the purpose of murder, I would be.
- pdonis 3y ago
  > If someone constructs something dangerous like an explosive and then hand it off for someone else's use they'd be culpable as well, wouldn't they? As others have commented, it would depend on the person's intent. If an explosive making company sells some explosives to a construction company for use in excavation, but then the construction company misuses the explosive and kills people, the explosive making company wouldn't be liable. But if person A makes some homemade explosives and gives them to person B to put into a bomb, and the bomb kills people, yes, we would hold person A liable. But even in that case the basis wouldn't be "reckless disregard for consequences", it would just be straight up murder.
- jjk166 3y ago
  Manufacturing and selling explosives in general is restricted, but assuming you follow the regulations you are not culpable for what people who legally purchase them do with them afterwards.
papercrane 3y ago
We hold tool makers responsible all the time. It all depends on how the tool is meant to be used and how it's marketed. For example, a voice cloning AI that's marketed and sold for people diagnosed with ALS to clone their voice in case they lose their ability to speak that is misused will not have any legal liability. However, if that same tool is marketed and sold to clone celebrity voices for commercials, then that company is going to have a bad time in court.
- pdonis 3y ago
  > if that same tool is marketed and sold to clone celebrity voices for commercials That wouldn't be "reckless disregard for consequences", though. It would be straight up fraud.

by pdonis 3y ago

SketchySeaBeast 3y ago

That's not true in all situations, is it? If someone constructs something dangerous like an explosive and then hand it off for someone else's use they'd be culpable as well, wouldn't they?

JohnFen 3y ago
It all depends. If I sell bottles of arsenic for the purpose of killing rats, I won't be held culpable if someone uses it for murder. If I sell bottles of arsenic for the purpose of murder, I would be.
pdonis 3y ago
> If someone constructs something dangerous like an explosive and then hand it off for someone else's use they'd be culpable as well, wouldn't they? As others have commented, it would depend on the person's intent. If an explosive making company sells some explosives to a construction company for use in excavation, but then the construction company misuses the explosive and kills people, the explosive making company wouldn't be liable. But if person A makes some homemade explosives and gives them to person B to put into a bomb, and the bomb kills people, yes, we would hold person A liable. But even in that case the basis wouldn't be "reckless disregard for consequences", it would just be straight up murder.
jjk166 3y ago
Manufacturing and selling explosives in general is restricted, but assuming you follow the regulations you are not culpable for what people who legally purchase them do with them afterwards.

papercrane 3y ago

We hold tool makers responsible all the time. It all depends on how the tool is meant to be used and how it's marketed. For example, a voice cloning AI that's marketed and sold for people diagnosed with ALS to clone their voice in case they lose their ability to speak that is misused will not have any legal liability. However, if that same tool is marketed and sold to clone celebrity voices for commercials, then that company is going to have a bad time in court.

pdonis 3y ago
> if that same tool is marketed and sold to clone celebrity voices for commercials That wouldn't be "reckless disregard for consequences", though. It would be straight up fraud.