After Australia’s first reported automated hacking accident, experts warn deployers – and possibly developers – of AI agents could be held liable for the actions of their bots
“the person controlling” becomes a bit murky as the person who provides the platform may be judged as controlling it, the user may be controlling it. The courts could be busy.
It’s assuming that the users actions are in control of the platform. The platform generates a lot of plausible output that, if incorrect or misleading, is not easily distinguished from truth. Who is responsible?
“the person controlling” becomes a bit murky as the person who provides the platform may be judged as controlling it, the user may be controlling it. The courts could be busy.
Why would the person who provides the platform be judged as controlling the users actions? When has that ever been true?
It’s assuming that the users actions are in control of the platform. The platform generates a lot of plausible output that, if incorrect or misleading, is not easily distinguished from truth. Who is responsible?