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

OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 343 posts

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#261

Post by nozzlegear »

ticulatedspline wrote: post #247
nozzlegear wrote: post #212

As an Iowan, this reminds me a lot of the bill that's been pushed through my state's senate twice now (as recently as last year), which would prevent Iowans from filing lawsuits against pesticide and herbicide companies if those companies follow the EPA's labeling guidelines. The bill passed the senate both times, only stopped because the house declined to take it up. For context, Iowa has the fastest growing rate of…

Honest question, isn't that like OK? Like if you have a product, and the government says the product is ok, and it's labeled per regulation and later that product turns out to be deleterious to people's health should the company be liable? Guess we should already have precedent but my google-fu is failing here. I can't seem to find the resolution of Felix-Lozano v. Nalge Nunc , Felix sued Nalgene over their use of BP…

I'm not a lawyer, nor a judge, so I can't say. All I can tell you is that it feels wrong that [Monsanto/OpenAI] can lobby a state's legislature to prevent you, the average joe and potential lucrative victim, from filing a lawsuit against them when it seems clear to any reasonable person that people are developing [cancer/mental health issues] due to the use of [pesticides/AI].

Perhaps something like anti-SLAPP rules for the ignominious corporations would be a happy middle ground? I don't know if that would "fix" anything – or if there's anything to fix – so don't take that as a super serious suggestion.

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#262

Post by himata4113 »

ben_w wrote: post #222
himata4113 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well the worst outcome is that you make something deadly which is what you are creating anyway, do that for a year and you could possibly produce a very deadly substance that doesn't have a known treatment.

"Worst" outcome assumes it's easy to give an ordering. Which is worse, (1) accidentally blowing yourself up with home-made nitroglycerin/poisoning yourself because your home-made fume hood was grossly insufficient, or (2) accidentally making a novel long-lived compound which will give 20 people slow-growing cancers that will on average lower their life expectancy by 2 years each? What if it's a small dose of a mercur…

As someone who also watches NileRed of course it is hard, but AI can give you solutions that normally you wouldn't be able to come up with due to lack of knowledge or/and education.

And to clarify, by 'worst case' I meant that you're already trying to create a deadly compound, worst that can happen is you kill yourself which was already an accepted risk by the user.

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#263

Post by greenie_beans »

himata4113 wrote: post #23

I have made both GPT 5.4 and Opus 4.6 produce me content on creating neurotoxic agents from items you can get at most everyday stores. It struggled to suggest how to source phosphorus, but eventually lead me to some ebay listings that sell phosphorus elemental 'decorations' and also lead me towards real!! blackmarket codewords for sourcing such materials. It coached me how to: stay safe, what materials I need, how to…

in 5th grade, i was able to access and read the anarchist cookbook. thanks to the internet. so idk

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#264

Post by testing22321 »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #242
testing22321 wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Viewed from a country with universal healthcare , 18 month’s maternity leave ( my partner just used it ) and so much more, it feels like comparing the US to “any democracy” is like comparing rocks to gold.

> viewed from a country with universal healthcare...it feels like comparing the US to “any democracy” is like comparing rocks to gold Do most democracies, extant or across history, have universal healthcare? You're comparing a policy to a governance structure.

All developed ones do, yes.

Except one of course.

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#265

Post by Planktonne »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #256
Planktonne wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a tool, but it's a tool that is sold by OpenAI as providing a high degree of intelligence. That's an endorsement of what the tool outputs as advice, which is what makes them responsible.

> That's an endorsement of what the tool outputs as advice That's not even close to true! Even if you've been living under a rock for the last 5 years and didn't already know these models are not reliable, pretty much every provider has a disclaimer next to the chat box informing you of that fact.

A small disclaimer under the main flow that also acts as cookie banner doesn't outweigh the many, many other statements claiming capabilities. It's a minor undercutting, sure, but it's perfectly possible to have all sorts of disclaimers [0] while still keeping the point clear.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KivCRqfFcqY

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#266

Post by [deleted] »

jmyeet wrote: post #206
Topfi wrote: post #66

Quoting the original bill [0]: > "Critical harm" means the death or serious injury of 100 or more people or at least $1,000,000,000 of damages to rights in property caused or materially enabled by a frontier model, through either: (1) the creation or use of a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapon; or (2) engaging in conduct that: (A) acts with no meaningful human intervention; and (B) would, if commit…

Shifting liabilities from corporations to the public coffer is what companies do. You'll often hear this described as "privatizing profits and socializing losses". Let me introduce you to the Price-Anderson Act of 1957 [1]. It's been repeatedly extended, most recently with the ADVANCE Act [2]. This limits liability for the nuclear power industry in a whole range of ways: - It removes jurisdiction from state courts to…

[deleted]

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#267

Post by Cytobit »

sizzzzlerz wrote: post #104
sassymuffinz wrote: post #5

So they did the math and worked out it's cheaper and easier to lobby the government instead of working to make their product safe. And these are the people that a lot programmers want to give the keys to the kingdom. Idiocracy really is in full effect.

That has been the methodology of businesses since the mid 20th century. And you know what? It works! Really well!

Works for who exactly?

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#268

Post by sassymuffinz »

nottorp wrote: post #214
sassymuffinz wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm creating a new start up called QuantumFlop Electricity - there's a 10% chance it will cause a black hole to open up in the Atlantic Ocean that may eventually consume us all but a 50% chance we'll have unlimited clean energy. We'll never know for sure if at any point that black hole may open as it's borrowing energy from the 81st dimension, but the upside seems pretty good. Should I be able to get on with it?

Funny, I was just rereading the Hyperion series. It says there clearly that it was the AIs that created the black hole that led to the destruction of Old Earth. Intentionally.

I've never read the book but I assume there were some sycophants who were praising the AI right up until it created a black hole that destroyed the planet.

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#269

Post by redsocksfan45 »

himata4113 wrote: post #23

I have made both GPT 5.4 and Opus 4.6 produce me content on creating neurotoxic agents from items you can get at most everyday stores. It struggled to suggest how to source phosphorus, but eventually lead me to some ebay listings that sell phosphorus elemental 'decorations' and also lead me towards real!! blackmarket codewords for sourcing such materials. It coached me how to: stay safe, what materials I need, how to…

[dead]

Re: OpenAI backs Illinois bill that would limit when AI labs can be held liable

#270

Post by nickitolas »

ticulatedspline wrote: post #247
nozzlegear wrote: post #212

As an Iowan, this reminds me a lot of the bill that's been pushed through my state's senate twice now (as recently as last year), which would prevent Iowans from filing lawsuits against pesticide and herbicide companies if those companies follow the EPA's labeling guidelines. The bill passed the senate both times, only stopped because the house declined to take it up. For context, Iowa has the fastest growing rate of…

Honest question, isn't that like OK? Like if you have a product, and the government says the product is ok, and it's labeled per regulation and later that product turns out to be deleterious to people's health should the company be liable? Guess we should already have precedent but my google-fu is failing here. I can't seem to find the resolution of Felix-Lozano v. Nalge Nunc , Felix sued Nalgene over their use of BP…

I don't think itd be ok, personally. My impression is regulations and regulatory institutions can be very slow to evolve after technological advances, unless the government is financially liable. A scheme I would be more comfortable with is mandatory insurance and insurance companies with a financial incentive absorbing the liability. On top of that probably add some bare minimum regulatory requirements/certifications.
Post reply on HN