Re:AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With ...
by rabidrat on Sunday November 25, 2018 @04:21PM
(#18529127)
There are many jobs for which the doer is personally liable. They are required to be bonded and insured so that if anything happens, they don't go bankrupt or otherwise avoid compensating for damages. And there are still people to do the work.
Not sure that's the best solution here, but the assumption that "no one would do the work" is likely not correct.
Re:AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With ...
by allannienhuis on Sunday November 25, 2018 @06:34PM
(#18529789)
Good point. Although if they're required to be bonded as part of the job requirements, that means they still don't feel the full effect of the cost of their mistakes which is what I think was being proposed. That said, it's a lot closer along that spectrum because I assume their ability to be bonded/insured will be affected by subsequent claims against the bond.
I'm also not sure exactly how bonding would work in jobs where blame is hard to determine, or not attributable to a single individual (ie systemic issue). Perhaps that's one of the reasons it's not done more commonly.
Re:AI Mistakes Bus-Side Ad for Famous CEO, Charges Her With ...
by Drdrdrq on Sunday November 25, 2018 @03:24PM
(#18528809)
True. Collective responsibility is a much better solution - then it is in bosses' best interest to create such environment that mistakes have as low impact as possible. And it's up to the whole team to make that happen. Similar to how it is done in (properly managed) software development companies.
What if you had to pay the cost of every bug you created? I'm sure a lot of us developers would be digging ditches instead. :)