4 ms·

> human lives are the cost of making the wrong decisions ... True. > ... AI can't be allowed to be a decision maker Non sequitur. Part 2 only follows from t

> human lives are the cost of making the wrong decisions ... True. > ... AI can't be allowed to be a decision maker Non sequitur. Part 2 only follows from the Part 1 if you can demonstrate that AI makes more errors, or more severe errors, than humans in the identical situation. And for those situations, I agree with you. But there are already many situations where the AI is making fewer errors than humans, and for those situations, it would be unethical to exclude AI (see Part 1).

engeljohnb 7d ago
Since AI can't be held liable for mistakes, it's immaterial whether the AI makes fewer mistakes than humans.
- GlacierFox 7d ago
  This isn't going to compute with the AI evangelists on here.
- RigelKentaurus 7d ago
  Not true. The company deploying or using the AI (not the frontier AI lab building it) needs to make sure that the AI works. Just like anything else. Not sure why this is complicated.
  - pessimizer 7d ago
    > The company deploying or using the AI (not the frontier AI lab building it) needs to make sure that the AI works. Ah, they need to. Thanks for clearing this up.
- marcus_holmes 7d ago
  Why can't the AI be held liable? If I pay a company to do something, and that company uses an AI to do the thing, and the AI messes it up, why isn't the company liable?
- tekne 7d ago
  Surely the only rational reason to care about liability is you get paid in the bad outcome. Let's assume you get paid 0$ for AI mistakes -- no liability at all. Then your EV is roughly: (AI accuracy - human accuracy) * (cost of accident) - (1 - human accuracy) * (human payout) Now I don't know about you, but even with pretty big numbers on the human payout scale and relatively small differences, I would not accept 10 million (presumably paid to my next of kin) to die. Does lead to weird situations where I may prefer humans for minor medical procedures where I can take the risk -- but only in edge cases. Or is there some weird punishment thing going on here?
nozzlegear 7d ago
Better error rates are an argument for AI into the process, but that doesn't justify making it the decision maker. Ethics concerns more than just the error rate, it also concerns the accountability, ability to appeal, due process, explainability, distribution of harm, and so on. Ethically, we can easily justify refusing to delegate responsibility and accountability to a system that has no responsibility or accountability.

engeljohnb 7d ago

Since AI can't be held liable for mistakes, it's immaterial whether the AI makes fewer mistakes than humans.

GlacierFox 7d ago
This isn't going to compute with the AI evangelists on here.
RigelKentaurus 7d ago
Not true. The company deploying or using the AI (not the frontier AI lab building it) needs to make sure that the AI works. Just like anything else. Not sure why this is complicated.
- pessimizer 7d ago
  > The company deploying or using the AI (not the frontier AI lab building it) needs to make sure that the AI works. Ah, they need to. Thanks for clearing this up.
marcus_holmes 7d ago
Why can't the AI be held liable? If I pay a company to do something, and that company uses an AI to do the thing, and the AI messes it up, why isn't the company liable?
tekne 7d ago
Surely the only rational reason to care about liability is you get paid in the bad outcome. Let's assume you get paid 0$ for AI mistakes -- no liability at all. Then your EV is roughly: (AI accuracy - human accuracy) * (cost of accident) - (1 - human accuracy) * (human payout) Now I don't know about you, but even with pretty big numbers on the human payout scale and relatively small differences, I would not accept 10 million (presumably paid to my next of kin) to die. Does lead to weird situations where I may prefer humans for minor medical procedures where I can take the risk -- but only in edge cases. Or is there some weird punishment thing going on here?

nozzlegear 7d ago

Better error rates are an argument for AI into the process, but that doesn't justify making it the decision maker. Ethics concerns more than just the error rate, it also concerns the accountability, ability to appeal, due process, explainability, distribution of harm, and so on. Ethically, we can easily justify refusing to delegate responsibility and accountability to a system that has no responsibility or accountability.