logoalt Hacker News

gregw2today at 11:21 AM1 replyview on HN

Err, no. If someone is at fault, it is definitely the company (OpenAI) not the employee in this case.

Just think, isn't the whole point of a company, of incorporating, is that the liability shifts from the employee to the firm?

It is 100% fair to hold the company responsible, and doubly so when the questionable thing the employee is doing is something that A) benefits the company, and B) is on company time (aand with company resources.) I know you weren't making a legal-minutia point but even the high level principles involved are and should be the opposite of what you suggest.

Companies may want to have their cake and eat it too (have employees do their dirty work but then push the blame on the employee) but that's not how it works and it's generally not a society you'd want to live in the more we head in that direction.


Replies

jltsirentoday at 1:51 PM

That's the difference between a profession and a job. If you work in a professional field, other people in the field will judge you by the standards of the profession.

Academic research is structured around people working under their own name and taking personal responsibility. Most people are employed, but employers are not directly involved in the research. Some people have more traditional jobs, but others will still judge them by the norms of the field. You can't use administrative loopholes to escape moral responsibility.

Employees can't have their cake and eat it too either. If you claim credit, you claim responsibility. If you claim that your employer is responsible, you claim that you had a supporting role and that you didn't make any intellectual contributions towards the result.