463
Microsoft Exec Suggests AI Agents Will Need to Buy Software Licenses - Business Insider (www.businessinsider.com)
submitted 6 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
69 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 95 points 6 months ago (9 children)

If the AI Agent counts as an employee then the company "employing" it is liable for what it does.

My guess is the argument will be that "it's a tool", not an employee, and therefore they take no responsibility. Though I'm sure that argument is not going to fly for very long. If your air hammer harms someone because the person operating it wasn't using it correctly, you're still liable.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago* (1 child)

    What? Companies aren't liable if the user doesn't follow the instructions or warnings and hurts themselves.

    DeWalt isn't liable because I was using their mini chainsaw while holding a branch with my bare hand and the saw bounced and cut me. I'm liable for being stupid.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago

    I don't think you understand the context of the situation I was proposing. I am not supposing that DeWalt would be liable. But let's say we work in a shop together and I'm using an air hammer to I dunno. Punch rivets. If I as an employee of that shop use the air hammer and something involving the air hammer happens to my coworker or a customer or whatever, it is extremely likely that the company I work for would be on the hook. Could they try to penalize me personally? Yes. Could the person who was injured sue me personally? Certainly. Would the company be off the hook if the air hammer malfunctioned causing injury? Maybe - And at that point I would expect the manufacturer to be liable. But my comment never mentioned the manufacturer.

    The context was companies using AI as a tool not companies manufacturing AI.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 6 months ago (6 children)

    I don't see how this distinction affects the question of responsibility at all. If anything, "it's an employee" gives the company more room for deniability.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    Lol. Ask Uber how the actions of their employees and contractors aren't their responsibility.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cq5y5w148p5o

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] -5 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    "More room for deniability" doesn't mean "perfect universal deniability."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •