Comment by cmiles8
4 hours ago
It’s only a matter of time until one of these causes real damage to the wrong party and OpenAI finds itself drowning in years of litigation for settlement amounts they can’t possibly ever pay in their current financial state.
On the present trajectory we’re 24-36 months away from another company inheriting the smoking wreckage of OpenAI as scraps handed over as compensation for damages.
In practice, hardly anyone seems to care about even quite serious cyberattacks, and consequences are only ever visited on powerless individuals.
Obviously https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_McKinnon would get the book thrown at him, but a major AI company doing the same thing? Consequences would be bad for shareholder value! Elite impunity would apply.
Because there’s usually nobody to sue. When a company claiming to be worth trillions is behind the attack it’s a very different situation. That’s a litigation goldmine.
It depends. Society allows a lot of harm because we consider things otherwise useful.
Those killed by climate change will never get compensation. Killing people with a car is not quite free, but very cheap.
And what is the mechanism by which society could stop such AI damage and push for punishment as per law, not per subjective usefulness? Voting every 4 years to a president that never fulfills his promises?
No, society does not want corporations with no responsibilities.
> No, society does not want corporations with no responsibilities.
It voted otherwise.