logoalt Hacker News

lenerdenator • yesterday at 9:12 PM • 1 reply • view on HN

That, in turn, allows for people to just point at the agent as a human analog and shirk responsibility. Understand: that's the goal of a lot of people who don't have anyone's best intentions but their own in mind.

Ultimately, they do nothing without humans in the loop. The prime mover here is a person who can bear at least some legal consequence for what the program does, even if it's just having to deal with an investigation.


Replies

salawat • yesterday at 11:53 PM

Which would be great if there wasn't the sleight-of-hand of the corporate veil to deal with, which makes further attempts by you to language police disingenuous. Though I'm 100% okay with the person who hits enter on the prompt having liability, it'll never ultimately work out that way, because that poor bastard is staring down the barrel of an unfeeling, amoral, bureaucratic machine giving them the choice of comply or be fired.

Corporations are from whence the liability problem spawns.