this post was submitted on 09 Jun 2023
47 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37730 readers
769 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Spitfire@pawb.social 3 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Huh….

I wonder how this will be ruled. Can the company really be held accountable for what the AI creates independently?

Kind of an unexplored area.

[–] ElectronSoup@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Doubtful, courts have already ruled AI isn't a 'person' who can create a copyrighted work, thus a non-person can't be held liable for defamation most likely.

[–] rysiek@mstdn.social 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@ElectronSoup @borari @Spitfire that's just mathwashing:
https://www.mathwashing.com/

The tool cannot be liable itself, obviously, but the creators of the tool and those who wield it absolutely can, depending on specific circumstances.

The "AI" does not "create independently". Just like a script with some randomness built in does not "create independently". Somebody designed and built the tool, somebody decided what training data to use, somebody decided to deploy it. These people are liable.

[–] borari@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

The tool cannot be liable itself, obviously, but the creators of the tool and those who wield it absolutely can...

I absolutely agree with you here. The creators of the tool are responsible for its content. I'm a complete supporter of Section 230 in the US, but I absolutely do not think that sort of protection should apply to companies like OpenAI. Their tool created the content, their tool "published" the content, they are responsible for that content.

load more comments (6 replies)