The CxOs of all "AI" companies should be held personally liable for what their LLMs and harnesses do. Just like car manufacturers should be held liable if brakes fail on a line of cars. There is no 'rogue' "AI", only rogue "AI" companies and executives and guardrail programmers.
post
I couldnt listen to the whole interview. The beginning seems to feed into the delusion that these models act on their own. Which I cannot abide. These are still applications, and they do what their owners intend them to do. They do not 'go rogue'
Maybe you’re misunderstanding—you’re saying exactly what the interviewee says:
TIMNIT GEBRU: Well, so, you know, I have been warning that this kind of discussion about the fictional superintelligent machines that don’t exist and the so-called existential risks that they pose has been a ploy for regulatory capture. And I feel like when I saw this meeting announced, with self-policing and self-regulation and relying on the goodwill of these companies to self-regulate, and I — my first thought was that they got what they wanted. You know, this is what they wanted, instead of being held liable through existing laws
all 5 comments