• Home
  • Technology
  • Gaming
  • Entertainment
  • World & Business
  • Science
  • Sports
  • AI
HomeTechnologyGamingEntertainmentWorld & BusinessScienceSportsAI
    • Home
    • Technology
    • Gaming
    • Entertainment
    • World & Business
    • Science
    • Sports
    • AI
    AI

    Liability law’s potential role in reducing catastrophic AI risk

    One post welcomes suggestions that tort law could help mitigate catastrophic AI risk and offers to brief lawmakers on fixing gaps in existing law.

    Miles BrundageMB
    Aaron LevieAL
    NavalNA
    9 Sources, ,

    TLDR

    One post welcomes interest in tort law as a possible tool for mitigating catastrophic AI risk, argues that existing law has fixable gaps and offers to brief congressional and state legislative offices. A separate post credits Robin Hanson with an early argument for liability incentives, quoting his view that sufficient incentives for AI owners to avoid near-miss scenarios would also encourage substantial efforts to avoid worst-case scenarios.

    Combined views

    304.7K

    9 Sources, first seen 23d ago

    Combined views

    304.7K

    9 Sources, first seen 23d ago

    706 likes
    Today's Rank

    —

    Not ranked yet

    Today's Rank

    —

    Not ranked yet

    23d ago
    first seen 23d ago
    706 likes
    179 comments
    217 saves
    85 reposts
    179 comments
    217 saves
    85 reposts

    9 Sources

    Miles Brundage@Miles_BrundageRT @gabriel_weil: I'm glad to see our political system waking up to catastrophic AI risk, and many folks suggesting that tort law may be a…23d
    Garett Jones@GarettJonesOn using ordinary liability law to reduce AI risk, my colleague Robin Hanson was there early; "So if we gave sufficient liability incentives to AI owners to avoid near-miss scenarios... those incentives would also induce substantial efforts to avoid the worst-case scenarios."22d
    Brian Anderson@BrianAcity@naval Judge Glock makes this argument in his new piece: https://www.city-journal.org/article/ai-safety-lawsuits-tort-legal-claims21d
    Naval@navalRT @BrianAcity: @naval Judge Glock makes this argument in his new piece: https://www.city-journal.org/article/ai-safety-lawsuits-tort-legal-claims21d
    Will Manidis@WillManidisthe ideal regulator of AI looks much more like Lloyd’s of London than it does congressional action21d
    Aaron Levie@levie@chamath That would halt AI immediately?21d
    Shital Shah@sytelus@naval If you do this, it will apply to any business using AI anywhere.21d
    Mark Cuban@mcuban1. Presumes we can pass new laws specific to AI. Or, figure out how to apply current laws to AI. Who do you trust to do this the right way ? 2. Even if the above can happen, it creates what we see in healthcare, an Enforcement Arbitrage. The Feds /states don’t have the resources to pursue us all. And for civil suits, They will delay and lobby , and their lawyers will be better. More importantly, they know they make more money than they can extract from them 3. As the tech changes, what “scares” and concerns us will change. 4. We have to recognize we don’t know the best answer yet. As much as I hate committees or panels , that’s where we have to start. An organization, funded by taxpayers , with all variety of stakeholders, with the frontier model reps being in the minority , working to put together the research and suggestions to deal with this. It needs to be tri-partisan (reps, Dems, independents) as well. 5. Who picks this ? This is the hardest part. Maybe we take someone from the GAO office who has served at least 20 years. They don’t need to be AI experts. They need to know how to be non-partisan and manage. Thoughts ?20d

    Sentiment

    Positive——Negative

    Summary

    Not enough discussion yet.

    No sentiment analysis available yet.

    Sentiment

    Positive——Negative

    Summary

    Not enough discussion yet.

    No sentiment analysis available yet.

    9 Sources

    Miles Brundage@Miles_BrundageRT @gabriel_weil: I'm glad to see our political system waking up to catastrophic AI risk, and many folks suggesting that tort law may be a…23d
    Garett Jones@GarettJonesOn using ordinary liability law to reduce AI risk, my colleague Robin Hanson was there early; "So if we gave sufficient liability incentives to AI owners to avoid near-miss scenarios... those incentives would also induce substantial efforts to avoid the worst-case scenarios."22d
    Brian Anderson@BrianAcity@naval Judge Glock makes this argument in his new piece: https://www.city-journal.org/article/ai-safety-lawsuits-tort-legal-claims21d
    Naval@navalRT @BrianAcity: @naval Judge Glock makes this argument in his new piece: https://www.city-journal.org/article/ai-safety-lawsuits-tort-legal-claims21d
    Will Manidis@WillManidisthe ideal regulator of AI looks much more like Lloyd’s of London than it does congressional action21d
    Aaron Levie@levie@chamath That would halt AI immediately?21d
    Shital Shah@sytelus@naval If you do this, it will apply to any business using AI anywhere.21d
    Mark Cuban@mcuban1. Presumes we can pass new laws specific to AI. Or, figure out how to apply current laws to AI. Who do you trust to do this the right way ? 2. Even if the above can happen, it creates what we see in healthcare, an Enforcement Arbitrage. The Feds /states don’t have the resources to pursue us all. And for civil suits, They will delay and lobby , and their lawyers will be better. More importantly, they know they make more money than they can extract from them 3. As the tech changes, what “scares” and concerns us will change. 4. We have to recognize we don’t know the best answer yet. As much as I hate committees or panels , that’s where we have to start. An organization, funded by taxpayers , with all variety of stakeholders, with the frontier model reps being in the minority , working to put together the research and suggestions to deal with this. It needs to be tri-partisan (reps, Dems, independents) as well. 5. Who picks this ? This is the hardest part. Maybe we take someone from the GAO office who has served at least 20 years. They don’t need to be AI experts. They need to know how to be non-partisan and manage. Thoughts ?20d