> And perhaps the people who built and deployed the autocomplete and the connection as well.

I disagree. IMO it's the person who connects the LLM to the button who bears the responsibility of the workings of the resulting contraption.

Shareholder meeting to CEO: you must connect the button.

CEO to CIO: you must connect the button.

CIO to VP AI: you must connect the button.

VP AI to team lead AI integration: you must connect the button.

Team lead AI integration to senior: you must connect the button.

Senior to medior: you must connect the button.

Medior to junior: Hey, Olmo. That button they were talking about. You know?

Olmo: Yeah.

Medior: You have to hook it up to the LLM output.

Olmo: Why?

Medior: The boss says so.

Olmo: Ok.

Shrugs and deploys.

I used to hear things like “if cigarettes/alcohol were invented now, they would never allow it”, indicating that consumer protection used to be a thing, as early as 10-20 years ago. Now when AI hit the market it was obvious how bad and dangerous it was, yet governments (even the supposedly good ones in Europe which still [pretend to] do consumer protection) did nothing to protect their citizens from the harms AI was causing.

If we still did (or ever did) consumer protection like that cigarette/alcohol myth above indicates, then the makers of that tool would indeed be responsible for when their products does dangerous things.