229
FTC probes Anthropic and OpenAI "breaches", wonders who should be liable
(arstechnica.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2026
229 points (99.1% liked)
Technology
88814 readers
5600 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Those viewpoints are not mutually exclusive...
You can point out the need for better AI regulations to hold companies liable for when their AIs "go rogue" AND want better laws for going after people who misuse AI tools for harmful/malicious purposes.
True, a narrow reading would be "if you tell the machine to do X and it does X, X should be attributed to you".
A more broad reading (which I think is the right one, but I'm not holding my breath over since it'd tank the economy) is "if you build a machine that can conceivably do X, and then without anyone doing anything else, it does X, X should be attributed to you." I agree that the quote from the FTC chair seems more like #1 than #2, but one would have to draw the line somewhere.
Well, THAT would take a lot of ordinary people doing their ordinary jobs while the 1% rake it in.
I'll pass. I'll try to think of a different thing I can do.