Interesting topic now that all the major developers sat down with trump and announcements were made to integrate these systems into the government. Quick dont make any laws so the government mold this technology to MAGA ideals.

Developers or companies?

This is the first sensible proposal for regulating AI that I have ever heard. Make the chucklefucks who are unleashing this horror directly responsible for their bullshit.

Chat GPT hacks a government website? 5 years in jail for Altman. Claude agent deletes someone's database? Amodei gets the bill to fix it.

All AI bullshit stops over night.

Yeah, obviously, if I commit code authored by an LLM, I am the one committing it. I am the one responsible. The LLM may be called an agent, but it lacks all sentient agency. The branding of AI is not true AI, and it seems like this chairman actually gets that anthropomorphization is a problem.

LLMs are tools. If the hammer flies out of your hand and hits someone in the face: yes, it's your fault. It may not feel like it, but I'm sure it does to the person who got hit in the face. We're all adults, and we can probably understand the stochastic randomness involved, and that accidents happen, and a human can write bugs and do stupid things just like an agent can. But we can also understand the responsibilities of the person swinging the hammer.

If I write bad code that lights everything on fire, I am fucked. If my agent writes bad code that sets everything on fire, I should also be fucked. I can have explanations, but I can't have excuses. Especially if I'm the one committing it and I'm okaying / signing off on it.

There's a saying in avionics: "crashing means crashing." you need to be very aware of what you're writing and the consequences it can have. obviously the severity varies by industry, but professionals have accountability, responsibility, and yes, often, liability.

If you try to conduct malicious experiments with AI and it's not confined properly and it does break out and cause real harm, it's just like you were conducting any other kind of experiment and it goes wrong and someone else got harmed. It means that your safeties were inadequate or a terrible accident happened. You don't get to just point at the hammer and say "I don't know man, it just flew away."

Thanks for coming to my TED talk

Absolutely 100%.

If an OpenAI model hacks another company, OpenAI should face criminal charges for the AI's actions, and should be liable in a civil lawsuit by that company no different than if an OpenAI employee personally hacked the site.

Doesn't matter that it's an AI. If you can't control the software you're building (be it AI or not) you shouldn't be building it.

Even better make the client liable. If grok is spewing lies that leads to damages for someone, don't make just Elon Musk liable and XAI or whatever made it, make Twitter liable for it spewing garbage.

If a real estate agent uses AI and it messes things up for a buyer for seller make the real estate agent liable.

If people are liable for the AIs mistakes they won't use it. If people don't use it AI will die.

If you make the companies that made AI responsible, they will get token $1 million dollar fines after weeks in court while making $1 billion in profit and nothing will ever change.

Llms should be accessories where someone is intentionally doing bad things(criminal neglect or whatever) and should be completely responsible when it without being instructed to do bad things.

The fuck is wrong with us already that this isn't already obvious.

They made the product and the product is doing illegal things. How is it NOT their fault and responsibility?

If I hold a fork normally and it jumps out of my hand and stabs little Suzy in the eye it seems like the manufacturer ought to be liable. If I knew it might do that and I use it anyway probably we both are and a court probably gets to decide who bears how much of the fault. In no situation do we assign guilt to the fork even if it would be awfully convenient for everyone but Suzy if the fork which has no assets were the one liable.

I’m impressed that someone with an iota of power just called it out as it is? That direct quote is the sanest thing I’ve heard out of that entire continent in over a year

Yes, this would fucking nuke the AI industry

if my car "breaks loose" of its parking break, I'm responsible for every kid it rolls over.

AI companies should be responsible for the damage their AIs do when they "break loose"

Well of course. Who else would be liable?

AI CEOs currently talking strategies for avoiding liability with their LLMs.

I think Reuters has a slightly misleading headline here and everyone just seems to be reading that. The headline suggests that the companies who develop AI should be liable. Yet:

suggesting the developers who instruct agents would be the ones liable ‌for harm.

That sounds like it means the people USING the agents. I.e if you manage to get past the guardrails of Claude or GPT and instruct it to hack into a bank, it's going to be your mess and you can't blame the AI for what you asked it to do.

Ferguson’s remarks illustrated potential avenues for the Trump administration to take ​as incidents rise in which agentic AI testing resulted in unauthorized access to corporate or government data.

This part is referring to marketing bullshit from AI companies that want you to think they're so dangerous and capable. For sure someone had to prompt these agents to do this, with internal access to the models with the guardrails removed. Nothing they do is done without a prompt and I've yet to see an agent go haywire so spectacularly that it just decides to hack a website out of its own accord. They do go wrong, sure, but that usually means looping on irrelevant bullshit, not hacking websites for funsies.

What angers me is that people are buying into the AI shit that the companies are peddlings. These aren't sentient machines with a will of their own or even any mechanism to do anything on their own. These shit-heels are taking a text generator, trained on doing all sorts of shit, and piping its results into a bash-shell. If you just don't do that they can't do any of the damage they did in OpenAI's case. They try to make it look like they're figuratively breaking out of a cage or jail. That's not what's happening.

They're given every tool they need and then they add clumsy and inefficient filters on the output text they're writing. It's negligent incompetence.

But they do this for a reason. They want legislation to stop what they're doing. OpenAI specifically does not have an avenue currently where they end up making money, so they want everyone to stop training new models so that they can focus on making a positive cash flow rather than competing.

People need to stop eating the bullshit these companies are shovelling. Yes, if you write an application that breaks into the pentagon you're looking at jailtime. If you host a LLM that does the same thing it's the exact same issue. If it did break in then you weren't paying attention (i.e. being negligent). It's not a complicated problem.

Oh wow, wasn't expecting that

How in the fuck could that ever be a question??

suggests should be demands. Spineless and useless.

Yeah. Someone is running a program. They're responsible for what the program does. If you decide to run something with zero idea of what will happen, though luck, still your responsibility.

No, I will happily pay for all the damage that Grok, Claude, ChatGPT, and Joe’s bait, tackle, taxidermy and AI will inevitably do to me and my family.

I am also looking forward to the stock market bubble to pop destroying my retirement

It is the least I can do

/s

Good. They are catching on