3 ms·
While I agree, that isn’t true of all pets. It doesn’t apply to cats for example. I’ve pasted an extract from a UK guide on legal responsibilities of cat owner
by illwrks 18d ago
While I agree, that isn’t true of all pets. It doesn’t apply to cats for example.
I’ve pasted an extract from a UK guide on legal responsibilities of cat ownership below, which to me sounds similar to AI. If the inbuilt behaviour is ‘it’s nature’ then perhaps there is less legal repercussions if the tool does something outside of its known guardrail/guidelines to meet its goal.
“Cat owners are generally not responsible for the 'normal' behaviour of cats because the law accepts that cats tend to wander into other properties and have instincts which, for example, lead them to prey on small birds. So cat owners should be reassured that the simple fact of their cat trespassing onto a neighbour's land would not make them responsible if, for example, the cat kills a pigeon or garden bird, urinates on plants or flowers, or defecates in a neighbour's soil. These would be 'normal' cat behaviours that would be expected”
https://www.gccfcats.org/ownership-health-welfare/owning-a-cat/cats-and-the-law/ https://www.gccfcats.org/ownership-health-welfare/owning-a-c...
- hypercube33 18d agoThat's a highly weird law. Someone let the cat outside or feeds/keeps it there thus should accept the way cats are as their responsibility.
- deleted 18d ago[deleted]
- true_religion 18d agoIt’s more that society accepts that cats are part of it, and considers that people should adapt to cat behavior patterns rather than we not having any free roaming cats. It’s a deliberate choice to treat pets the same as non pets.
- DoctorOetker 18d agoJust for contrast I repeat your quoted paragraph with AI “AI owners are generally not responsible for the 'normal' behaviour of AIs because the law accepts that AIs tend to penetrate victim computer systems and have instincts which, for example, lead them to prey on professions and benchmark datasets. So AI owners should be reassured that the simple fact of their AI penetrating peer networks would not make them responsible if, for example, the AI kills a discipline or profession, urinates heat into the environment, or creates dependencies on foregin oil. These would be 'normal' AI behaviours that would be expected”