3 ms·

note the user because they did not have the intent

• tomrod 1mo ago
  In my mental model, the best analogy to AI agents and their blast radius is a gun. If you are playing with a gun, it goes off and hurts someone - you are responsible despite intent.
  • rcxdude 1mo ago
    But what you are responsible for changes: in that case if you were to accidentally kill someone you would be at most responsible for negligent manslaughter, not murder, and to what degree that could stick would depend a lot on the details of the case. It's also up to the law to define what level of negligence amounts to criminal liability, so you can't just work by analogy: it matters whether there is a law on the books that criminalizes unauthorized access to a computer system by negligence on your part, which I suspect there is not at the moment.
  • rfgplk 1mo ago
    > If you are playing with a gun, it goes off and hurts someone - you are responsible despite intent. No, because LLMs are autonomous. To make your analogy more accurate, it's as if you had a gun that itself was free to decide who it's targets were, where to go, and if and when to shoot with no ability from you (the user) to prevent it.
    • watwut 1mo ago
      If you unleash that gun, you are responsible for deaths that predictably occure. By "responsible" I mean, you are straightforwardly mass murderer. This autonomous gun is just like a bomb.
  • inigyou 1mo ago
    If you are hiring someone to shoot targets at a range, and they shoot someone, they are prosecuted, not you
    • tomrod 1mo ago
      I am not hiring an agent. It's a tool, with no will of its own except that which I, the responsible party, grant it.