See now this is interesting. I believe there is a difference between bad decisions and illegal decisions and what individuals can be held liable for. As long as a company using this “CEO ai can demonstrate reasonable frameworks were in place around the decisions it was acting upon, such as “hmm maybe we won’t eat the first born child of every customer or let’s let’s not spend the companies full cash reserves on crack”, I think there are protections from liability.
This simply came out of me challenging the assertion in a comment higher up stating that a company still needed a CEO/person to be held liable for what the LLM could do. I didn’t think it was that black and white.
So board of directors are liable if the company itself isnt directly liable is the short answer, directors can hold joint liability along with the company
See now this is interesting. I believe there is a difference between bad decisions and illegal decisions and what individuals can be held liable for. As long as a company using this “CEO ai can demonstrate reasonable frameworks were in place around the decisions it was acting upon, such as “hmm maybe we won’t eat the first born child of every customer or let’s let’s not spend the companies full cash reserves on crack”, I think there are protections from liability.
This is self evidently true, or I’d be in jail for the relationships I had in my teens.
To be liable you need to have broken a law. So yes a person, or an AI, can make stupid but legal decisions, for which no legal liability accrues.
Not too sure where you’re going with this though
This simply came out of me challenging the assertion in a comment higher up stating that a company still needed a CEO/person to be held liable for what the LLM could do. I didn’t think it was that black and white.
So board of directors are liable if the company itself isnt directly liable is the short answer, directors can hold joint liability along with the company