11–15 of 15 posts
Fun idea but the liability must be immense for the user. This is even worse than lawyers getting hallucinated court cases since the output has real physical implications.
I’ve worked with a lot of builders and engineers who swear the architect must have been hallucinating and question whether having ChatGpt produce the drawings would be any worse.
Hi. Licensed architect here. I am absolutely all for further automation in the AEC sector. But if a licensed MEP used this I would report them to the state for violating the standard of care. Across the licensed professions in building design, our license requirements state (in summary) that we certify that the documents were prepared under our "close supervision." I think in all states if A and E professionals form…
How is this different?
Hi. Licensed architect here. I am absolutely all for further automation in the AEC sector. But if a licensed MEP used this I would report them to the state for violating the standard of care. Across the licensed professions in building design, our license requirements state (in summary) that we certify that the documents were prepared under our "close supervision." I think in all states if A and E professionals form…
Correct me if I'm wrong. The licensed MEP can supervise unlicensed people. However, the licensed MEP takes the full liability for it. How is this different?
What they are not is a probabilistic model that cannot be held accountable for errors. I mean, unless the developers of automep.app want to take legal liability for the performance of their model.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Correct me if I'm wrong. The licensed MEP can supervise unlicensed people. However, the licensed MEP takes the full liability for it. How is this different?
A licensed architect or SMEP can supervise unlicensed people, and yes they take the liability. That junior person, if they're put in a position to do any damage generally has a professional or pre-professional degree in the field. They have been taught the necessity of the standard of care. They can suffer consequences - if something goes wrong it can be blamed on them. (even if as unlicensed staff they can't really…
It's pretty common for CAD software (and other software in general) to have an AS/IS license. It's up to the user to detect it and correct any bugs the software may have had.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A licensed architect or SMEP can supervise unlicensed people, and yes they take the liability. That junior person, if they're put in a position to do any damage generally has a professional or pre-professional degree in the field. They have been taught the necessity of the standard of care. They can suffer consequences - if something goes wrong it can be blamed on them. (even if as unlicensed staff they can't really…
Right, but there is still liability, right? And liability still resides in the licensed professional. It doesn't go straight from the model to the customer. It's pretty common for CAD software (and other software in general) to have an AS/IS license. It's up to the user to detect it and correct any bugs the software may have had.