Hacker News Reader

Comment by gruez | Hacker News Reader

criminally liable? Of course you have to pay their medical bills, but unless there was some serious negligence on your side (eg. you let it off leash), you won't be criminally liable.

View on HN

Yeah, that's an important distinction. Apparently criminal convictions have happened depending on the level of negligence of the dog owner. It gets debated and legally fought when it happens. I don't have strong opinions on it, seems like a very case-by-case type of thing.

At this point it might be fair to say that Open AI is being negligent with a known risk.

In America, paying medical bills might be considered significant punishment itself...

> Of course you have to pay

Have these labs pay ANYTHING?

That requires the victim to sue in court, or as some people have speculated OpenAI might have already settled with the victims in private.

They have not caused damage (or enough that a counter party found it worthwhile to sue). They have to pay if they actually cause damage AND someone sues them. Clearly these conditions have not been met, but somehow people feel like some third party (the state?) should just punish OpenAI because of vague feelings.

They have not caused damage?

You forget the people who have unalived themselves because some LLM told them to do so.

my next door neighbour told me to eat shit (not a nice woman) and … I didn’t … until obeying what LLMs tell you becomes a law people doing shit because LLM told them is natural selection playing out

I dont know what the word unalive means

>You forget the people who have unalive themselves because some LLM told them to do so.

Besides the obvious conversational derail (we were talking about ai hacking up till now), that case is being litigated right now.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com