Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Air Canada is responsible for chatbot's mistake: B.C. tribunal

bc.ctvnews.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 434 posts

Re: Air Canada is responsible for chatbot's mistake: B.C. tribunal

#141

Post by Delumine »

carlosjobim wrote: post #123
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this different from me getting one of my friends to work at Air Canada and promise me a billion dollars to cancel my flight? Will Air Canada be legal for my friend going against company policy?

Law and justice is not like a computer program that you can exploit and control without limits by being a hacker. If the chatbot told them that they'd get a billion dollars, the courts would not hold Air Canada responsible for it, just as if a programmer put a decimal wrong and prices became obviously wrong. In this case, the chat bot gave a policy within reason and the court awarded the passenger what the bot had pr…

This argument seems overly dramatic and distorted. Yes, in an outrageous situation like a billion-dollar mishap, most people would know something isn't right. But for a policy that appears legitimate, especially when it's replacing a human customer service rep, it's not that obvious. In these cases, Air Canada should definitely be held accountable.

Re: Air Canada is responsible for chatbot's mistake: B.C. tribunal

#142

Post by Fnoord »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #117
ooboe wrote: post #116

"In an argument that appeared to flabbergast a small claims adjudicator in British Columbia, the airline attempted to distance itself from its own chatbot's bad advice by claiming the online tool was "a separate legal entity that is responsible for its own actions." "This is a remarkable submission," Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) member Christopher Rivers wrote."" From https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbi…

How is this different from me getting one of my friends to work at Air Canada and promise me a billion dollars to cancel my flight? Will Air Canada be legal for my friend going against company policy?

AI has auth from higher up to be used 1:1 as truth. Your friend does not have auth to promise you 1 billion in their employers name.

Re: Air Canada is responsible for chatbot's mistake: B.C. tribunal

#143

Post by eirikbakke »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #117
ooboe wrote: post #116

"In an argument that appeared to flabbergast a small claims adjudicator in British Columbia, the airline attempted to distance itself from its own chatbot's bad advice by claiming the online tool was "a separate legal entity that is responsible for its own actions." "This is a remarkable submission," Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) member Christopher Rivers wrote."" From https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbi…

How is this different from me getting one of my friends to work at Air Canada and promise me a billion dollars to cancel my flight? Will Air Canada be legal for my friend going against company policy?

The legal concept is called "Apparent authority". The test is whether "a reasonable third party would understand that an agent had authority to act".

("Chatbot says you can submit a form within 90 days to get a retroactive bereavement discount" sounds perfectly reasonable, so the doctrine applies.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apparent_authority

Re: Air Canada is responsible for chatbot's mistake: B.C. tribunal

#144

Post by [deleted] »

ooboe wrote: post #116

"In an argument that appeared to flabbergast a small claims adjudicator in British Columbia, the airline attempted to distance itself from its own chatbot's bad advice by claiming the online tool was "a separate legal entity that is responsible for its own actions." "This is a remarkable submission," Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) member Christopher Rivers wrote."" From https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbi…

[deleted]

Re: Air Canada is responsible for chatbot's mistake: B.C. tribunal

#145

Post by Night_Thastus »

thsksbd wrote: post #131
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this different from me getting one of my friends to work at Air Canada and promise me a billion dollars to cancel my flight? Will Air Canada be legal for my friend going against company policy?

That's fraud because you're in cahoots with your friend. If a random AC employee gave you a free flight, on the other hand, you'd be entitled to it. Anyway, the chat bot has no agency except that given to it by AC; unlike a human employee, therefore, its actions are 100% AC actions. I don't see how this is controversial? Why do people think that laws no longer apply when fancy high-tech pixie dust is sprinkled?

>If a random AC employee gave you a free flight, on the other hand, you'd be entitled to it.

The company would be entirely within their rights to say 'this employee was wrong, that is not our policy, goodbye!'. This happens all the time with more minor incidents.

Re: Air Canada is responsible for chatbot's mistake: B.C. tribunal

#146

Post by kube-system »

BadHumans wrote: post #119
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this different from me getting one of my friends to work at Air Canada and promise me a billion dollars to cancel my flight? Will Air Canada be legal for my friend going against company policy?

Chatbots aren't people and people are actually separate legal entities responsible for their own actions.

People working for companies are sometimes separate legal entities responsible for their own actions, and sometimes they act on behalf of the company they work for and the company is responsible for their actions. It depends.

Re: Air Canada is responsible for chatbot's mistake: B.C. tribunal

#147

Post by baggy_trough »

thsksbd wrote: post #131
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this different from me getting one of my friends to work at Air Canada and promise me a billion dollars to cancel my flight? Will Air Canada be legal for my friend going against company policy?

That's fraud because you're in cahoots with your friend. If a random AC employee gave you a free flight, on the other hand, you'd be entitled to it. Anyway, the chat bot has no agency except that given to it by AC; unlike a human employee, therefore, its actions are 100% AC actions. I don't see how this is controversial? Why do people think that laws no longer apply when fancy high-tech pixie dust is sprinkled?

A random AC employee drinks too much and says "You are entitled to free flights for the rest of your life." Is Air Canada liable?

Re: Air Canada is responsible for chatbot's mistake: B.C. tribunal

#148

Post by JCM9 »

With execs pounding their fist on the table saying “Go get me some of that GenAI stuff!” expect to see a lot more really poorly implemented “AI assistants” and other half-baked AI projects causing blunders for businesses. Eventually the dust will settle and folks will find more attenuated ways to get value out of this tech without creating a big mess. In the meantime get some popcorn ready for the AI-fueled comedy of errors that’s about to play out across many companies.

Re: Air Canada is responsible for chatbot's mistake: B.C. tribunal

#149

Post by DonHopkins »

thsksbd wrote: post #131
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this different from me getting one of my friends to work at Air Canada and promise me a billion dollars to cancel my flight? Will Air Canada be legal for my friend going against company policy?

That's fraud because you're in cahoots with your friend. If a random AC employee gave you a free flight, on the other hand, you'd be entitled to it. Anyway, the chat bot has no agency except that given to it by AC; unlike a human employee, therefore, its actions are 100% AC actions. I don't see how this is controversial? Why do people think that laws no longer apply when fancy high-tech pixie dust is sprinkled?

Because their source of income depends on sprinkling fancy high-tech pixie dust!

Re: Air Canada is responsible for chatbot's mistake: B.C. tribunal

#150

Post by Zak »

thsksbd wrote: post #131
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this different from me getting one of my friends to work at Air Canada and promise me a billion dollars to cancel my flight? Will Air Canada be legal for my friend going against company policy?

That's fraud because you're in cahoots with your friend. If a random AC employee gave you a free flight, on the other hand, you'd be entitled to it. Anyway, the chat bot has no agency except that given to it by AC; unlike a human employee, therefore, its actions are 100% AC actions. I don't see how this is controversial? Why do people think that laws no longer apply when fancy high-tech pixie dust is sprinkled?

And if a random AC employee said[0] they'd give you a billion dollars, you wouldn't be entitled to it because any judge or jury hearing the case would say a reasonable person wouldn't believe that. Unlike computers, which do exactly what they're told[1], the legal system applies sanity checks and social context.

[0] perhaps because they're disgruntled and trying to hurt their employer

[1] generative models are not an exception; they're a way of telling computers to generate text that sometimes contains falsehoods

Post reply on HN