3 ms·

I believe this is a reaction to Dario Amodei's essay yesterday, "We Must Pace the Frontier": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49672510 https://news.ycombina

I believe this is a reaction to Dario Amodei's essay yesterday, "We Must Pace the Frontier": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49672510 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49672510 Cohere's disagreement seems mostly about who makes the rules. From the essay (which does seem significantly written by AI, sadly): > The rules around AI are getting written either way. What's still open is whether they get written by a group anyone can join and with evidence anyone can check, or by a handful of companies in a room with the door shut. Of course none of the AI companies will suggest that they should be accountable for the illegal actions taken by agents they host, but I feel like that could be a very effective "pacing mechanism", and addresses the concerns brought up by this essay about fairness and transparency.

ElProlactin 19d ago
> Of course none of the AI companies will suggest that they should be accountable for the illegal actions taken by agents they host, but I feel like that could be a very effective "pacing mechanism"... The problem is that the potential liabilities arguably vastly exceed what these companies can absorb. It would be interesting to see if any major insurer wanted to step up and insure them. On the plus side, in the worst case scenarios, we won't have to worry about damages because nobody will be left to pursue them.
- watwut 19d ago
  The way they operate? No sane insurer. But the whole point is changing their behavior. > The problem is that the potential liabilities arguably vastly exceed what these companies can absorb It is ok. Fines should not be just a cost of business.
  - ElProlactin 19d ago
    Just look at Meta's recent settlement. The minds and mental health of countless young people harmed. And they'll pay $17 billion, which is about one month's worth of revenue. The legal system today does not serve the purpose you're wanting it to.
- anon291 19d ago
  Then the law is simple, no insurance? No product. No need to slow down development. Anyone who can make a good product should develop as fast as possible.
anon291 19d ago
English common law has been one of the greatest legal inventions of all time for business and accountability. Under common law a company that releases a product that has unintended consequences is liable for those. So naturally companies want to pretend this is somehow different.

ElProlactin 19d ago

> Of course none of the AI companies will suggest that they should be accountable for the illegal actions taken by agents they host, but I feel like that could be a very effective "pacing mechanism"... The problem is that the potential liabilities arguably vastly exceed what these companies can absorb. It would be interesting to see if any major insurer wanted to step up and insure them. On the plus side, in the worst case scenarios, we won't have to worry about damages because nobody will be left to pursue them.

watwut 19d ago
The way they operate? No sane insurer. But the whole point is changing their behavior. > The problem is that the potential liabilities arguably vastly exceed what these companies can absorb It is ok. Fines should not be just a cost of business.
- ElProlactin 19d ago
  Just look at Meta's recent settlement. The minds and mental health of countless young people harmed. And they'll pay $17 billion, which is about one month's worth of revenue. The legal system today does not serve the purpose you're wanting it to.
anon291 19d ago
Then the law is simple, no insurance? No product. No need to slow down development. Anyone who can make a good product should develop as fast as possible.

anon291 19d ago

English common law has been one of the greatest legal inventions of all time for business and accountability. Under common law a company that releases a product that has unintended consequences is liable for those. So naturally companies want to pretend this is somehow different.