That's the same thing. You signed off on the agent doing things on your behalf; you are responsible.

If you gave a loaded gun to a five year old, would "five-year-old did it" be a valid excuse?

If the five year old was a product resulting from trillions of dollars in investments, and the marketability of that product required people to be able to hand guns to that five year old without liability, then we would at least be having that discussion.

Purely organically of course.

	▲	kazinator 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		No purveyors of agentic AI are taking on liability for the consequences of their users deploying it. It's literally not in any of their terms of use or licensing or whatever document. That's just in the imaginations of the "AI did it" excuse makers. It may be that the imagination is stirred up by marketing and surrounding hype, but it's not in the binding wording. Nobody is going to do that; it would be crazy. Like to owe money to anyone claiming to have lost their files, or lost clients, or whatever other harm.
	▲	Terr_ 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> If the five year old was a product resulting from trillions of dollars in investments In weird way, that's actually true. It's a highly- (soon to be fully-) autonomous giga-swarm of the most complicated nanobots in existence, the result of investments over hundreds of thousands of years. That said, we don't really get to choose which ones we own, although we do have input on their maintenance. :p