← Back to context Comment by ForHackernews 4 days ago [flagged] 6 comments ForHackernews Reply ddalex 4 days ago A human is not punished, the access of the robot to the API is restricted. The human has not suffered any damage. ForHackernews 4 days ago The human paid money for access that has now been revoked. ddalex 3 days ago The human also started the bot. pja 4 days ago You’re responsible for the things your AI agent does. ForHackernews 4 days ago I'll be very surprised if our corporate masters allow that to be true, legally https://incidentdatabase.ai/cite/622/ lucianbr 4 days ago If Google and OpenAI and the rest would say this as loud as they praise their models, I would never write comments like that. But this is the fine print, buried somewhere. And so we need to bring it up, because, lo and behold, it matters.
ddalex 4 days ago A human is not punished, the access of the robot to the API is restricted. The human has not suffered any damage. ForHackernews 4 days ago The human paid money for access that has now been revoked. ddalex 3 days ago The human also started the bot.
ForHackernews 4 days ago The human paid money for access that has now been revoked. ddalex 3 days ago The human also started the bot.
pja 4 days ago You’re responsible for the things your AI agent does. ForHackernews 4 days ago I'll be very surprised if our corporate masters allow that to be true, legally https://incidentdatabase.ai/cite/622/ lucianbr 4 days ago If Google and OpenAI and the rest would say this as loud as they praise their models, I would never write comments like that. But this is the fine print, buried somewhere. And so we need to bring it up, because, lo and behold, it matters.
ForHackernews 4 days ago I'll be very surprised if our corporate masters allow that to be true, legally https://incidentdatabase.ai/cite/622/
lucianbr 4 days ago If Google and OpenAI and the rest would say this as loud as they praise their models, I would never write comments like that. But this is the fine print, buried somewhere. And so we need to bring it up, because, lo and behold, it matters.
A human is not punished, the access of the robot to the API is restricted. The human has not suffered any damage.
The human paid money for access that has now been revoked.
The human also started the bot.
You’re responsible for the things your AI agent does.
I'll be very surprised if our corporate masters allow that to be true, legally https://incidentdatabase.ai/cite/622/
If Google and OpenAI and the rest would say this as loud as they praise their models, I would never write comments like that. But this is the fine print, buried somewhere. And so we need to bring it up, because, lo and behold, it matters.