Yeah that's such a cop-out and a scary attempt at one as well!! AI should always be under the management of humans, and the companies who make up those humans. And thus those humans should be responsible for its output.
I think it's so funny they chose the thorny legal debate of AI personhood as a strategy to save 880 bucks, that's hilarious and i bet the judge had a good laugh.
Yeah that's such a cop-out and a scary attempt at one as well!! AI should always be under the management of humans, and the companies who make up those humans. And thus those humans should be responsible for its output.
I think it's so funny they chose the thorny legal debate of AI personhood as a strategy to save 880 bucks, that's hilarious and i bet the judge had a good laugh.
Tinmanning: anthropomorphizing machines.
Botblaming: obscuring liability by pinning
it on a legal non-person.
I'll add tinmanning and botblaming to my AI-lexicon. :)