If an employee does something during his employment, even if he wasn't told directly to do it, the company can be held vicariously liable, how is this any different?

▲

apercu 12 hours ago | parent [-]

I agree with you but you can’t jail a gen-ai model, I guess, is where the difference lies?

▲

LeifCarrotson 11 hours ago | parent | next [-]

"The company can be held vicariously liable" means that in this analogy, the company represents the human who used AI inappropriately, and the employee represents the AI model that did something it wasn't directly told to do.

▲

phailhaus 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Nobody tries to jail Microsoft Word, they jail the person using it.

	▲	gorjusborg 11 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Nobody tries to jail the automobile being driven when it hits a pedestrian when on cruise control. The driver is responsible for knowing the limits of the tool and adjusting accordingly.