Comment by ratelimitsteve

two things:

1) this whole case hinges on intentionality and the gov't intends to prove that he set the fire intentionally. part of the chatgpt history is images he generated of fires and people running from fires. If he intentionally set a fire in a wildfire-prone area it doesn't matter that he didn't intend it to be a wildfire or anything he did after he set the fire.

2) If you'd like to have emergency services that are either prohibitively expensive or simply nonexistent, one great way to do that is to make first responders responsible for not doing a good enough job in their responses. I'm honestly not sure what we'd do in cases of blatantly neglectful behavior by a first responder during an emergency response, but beyond intentional malpractice we generally extend an assumption of good faith to anyone who bothers to show up and help during an emergency like this. The first time I get sued for not putting a fire out fast enough or completely enough is the last time I put out a fire.