oskdkdjejdj

The practical difference is that a pile of code instructing machinery to act in a predetermined way does not in any way, shape, or form equate to agency or free will, therefore it cannot be held accountable, consequently its operators should be.

This line of thinking is better left to freshmen philosophy students trying to sound smart on their first week of college.

Now you’re arguing that we’re just throwing a tantrum for fear of losing our position in the food chain? What?

This is also easily proven incorrect when you start to analyse how “print” works and wether it stands to be improved in any way.

No. No code is “perfect”.

Accidents can happen. Negligence can also happen. In both cases you can trace the fault back to a human.

Human-like is not human. Humans have agency and free will, LLMs do not. They only act when instructed and they are only as capable as they are allowed to be. The operator is still the responsible party. An LLM cannot be held accountable, its operator, however can and should.

Are you sincerely arguing that we hold tools accountable for their operator’s mistakes? Do you sincerely, honestly, think that it makes any sense whatsoever to put a hammer on trial for bashing someone’s skull in?

That’s entirely irrelevant.