Except where does the accountability land?

If an individual employee does something unethical or illegal, the employee is accountable and may lose their license or face penalties, and if the company performed the right due diligence and training first then responded "correctly" when they learned of the employee's behavior, their liability might even be zero. There is case law on this topic.

But if a MODEL mis-advises or acts in an unethical or illegal way, who is accountable? The business team that spec'd and tested the solution/product? The architects and the developers? I've never met an architect or consultant with professional liability insurance.

There isn't enough tested law in this area yet.

▲

bee_rider 5 hours ago | parent [-]

It might not be tested. But, it would seem very weird if anyone other than the person using the LLM was accountable for the output.

	▲	steelframe 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		What if the company has provided the harness, tool execution environment, MCP servers, and LLM provider subscription for the employee to use? What if the company has provided a set of skills and other prompt context that could lead to undesirable behavior in certain unforeseen circumstances? What if the permission prompt the user sees 30 dozen times a day looks like, "OK to execute this random shell script?" Accountability really is hard in this new world.
	▲	scarby2 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		An individual software engineer could be held accountable but they are not liable for actions not taken maliciously.