Andrew Cullen:
[…] if a human asks an AI agent to gather health statistics, and the agent hacks a government server to do so, the human could lack the deliberate intent required for a conviction. The AI agent, meanwhile, lacks the legal personhood to be charged, as well as human intentionality.
Current Australia laws effectively treat AI actions as if they are something that just happens to us – like a severe weather event. This shows a glaring loophole in our legal system that does not hold those who make, maintain and use these systems to account when something goes wrong.
Very true. Unfortunately, the discourse is being shit up by some of the most ignorant and, frankly, stupid people in our society whose only real goal here is to make themselves feel smart on social media. Not everyone needs to be an expert on AI, I’m certainly not, but we should all at least be making an effort to read and learn about what is actually happening in reality before jumping in with some vitriolic one-liner or hot take designed to go viral and get attention. It has become a binary, us vs them political/ideological debate like any other and that is significantly impairing humanity’s broader understanding of the real problems and slowing our response to them.
Later on what will really bake your noodle is thinking about how many comments on social media are bot generated. Depending on where you look, it’s almost 60% (if not more)
“It’S jUsT sPiCy AuTo CoRrEcT” is the calling card of someone who has very little understanding of the technology.