AI accident: who is responsible?
Imagine…
It is 20 years in the future. You work for a company called Techsolves. AI is used for a lot of tasks and most of the time, things happen without a problem. However, one day something goes wrong: a robot malfunctions and a person gets hurt.
Look at the opinions about who is responsible:
"The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe!"
"The owner of Techsolves is responsible. They should keep all workers safe at all times."
"The worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful. It’s no different to if they hurt themselves some other way."
Over to you!
- Which option do you agree with most?
- Which option do you agree with least?
Comments (356)
I agree the least with option C.
As saying its the worker's fault oversimplifies things. Imagine using a new tool; sometimes, it might not work perfectly. It's similar with advanced robots. Blaming the worker ignores the possibility of problems in the robot or the system. We all work together with technology, and safety is a team effort. Instead of blaming, it's better to focus on fixing any issues, making sure both people and machines stay safe. This way, we learn and make things better for everyone.
I agree because it is not the worker's fault that the equipment is unsafe. This could be a better learning experience if we focus one what was done wrong instead who did something wrong.
I agree because... The mistake is not from the workers it might be the things that was used in programming the AI robots the were not good or was not safe enough to be used, but I will say that if we are focused on what we are doing it will be more better than focusing on the mistake you have made.
Actually I agree with your point, in my own opinion because I tend to agree more because the fault can be from the producers why, because of the lack of material and equipment to acquire a sufficient and long lasting hardware properties so as to enable the AI bots to last long for accurate usage and capabilities to do work to reduce stress for the humans.
So in conclusion, AI accidents is actually caused by the producers because of the lack of hardware properties which is caused by the lack of economic and probably financial standards like in the country Nigeria where the economy standard is not well being measured because of some of the leaders. Thanks.
I agree with you because when producers make ai they are low sometimes low in quality because of the following reasons.
1. produces do not have enough time to test run products they produced to ensure it efficiency and sometime what they produce tend to be faulty.
2. they get more expensive in markets because the standard of living especially in Nigeria increases on a daily basis . also they materials used to create them does not reduce either. since standard of living is increasing they demand for these product are reducing at a very high pace because people are more interested in what they are going to eat than a machine that gives a helping hand. therefore putting the producer at the losing end because his products are not selling.
3. as the materials to buy these things are increasing in prize producers settle for the cheaper ones which the quality is not as high as the one they were using so the quality reduces automatically. thereby endangering the lives of individuals.
thank you
I agree, blaming people is wasting their time and taking them away from what's really important. They should be trying to make the robot better and finding ways to make the robot not malfunction again. They should work together instead of blaming each other.
I totally agree with you because not always the injured worker is the responsible of been like that because, as you said before, if the worker tried to use a new tool, it's obvious that you don't know how to use it and probably you have difficulties to understand its use.
This is a difficult question because it might just be carelessness from the worker or it might be something wrong with the AI but I think option (a) might be most important because if the AI / robot it is not completely safe it should not be in the workplaces.
But also it is partly (b) because the factory owner should always keep its workers safe because that is their job (to keep the workers safe) and the workers expect to be kept safe while they are doing their job. Also, the AI might not be programmed properly so that if it was programmed properly, the problem might not have ever happened. The factory owner should've checked that the AI was safe before letting the people in the factory use it in their work.
Good evaluation of the options!
I agree because in such a situation, a good boss should make sure that the AI system is perfectly safe in order to ensure safety of workers because I think that in this scenario there are few human workers left and a boss ought to do all in his power to keep those human workers. I think that it is mostly B if the Ai is new which means that it has not been testing But I think that it is A if it has been used for a long time it is option A This situation sounds very advanced were the AI are self learning because there are already ongoing attempts to create self learning AI and if successful, this situation would be a lot worse because other AIs might think they are able to hurt humans and hide it as a malfunction. This could lead to a drastic decrease in man power. Such self learning AI are known as self adaptive AI.
I partially disagree that a boss should ensure AI is perfectly safe because it may be impossible to do so due to perhaps limitless ways to integrate it in the workforce, and AI can make unexpected mistakes (such as when Air Canada was defeated in court after one of their chatbots lied about some of their policies). Additionally, error is needed for development and can lead to new discoveries that can improve safety. However, the boss should still appropriately train their employees to safely deal with unprecedented circumstances.
I agree because...I this situation, a good manger will do everything to make sure the AI systems are working well and if the AI bots are working well the workers will be safe and if the are not safe the can make a lot of mistakes in the process of keeping it safe but as for point B if the tech solvers are responsible then the other workers should be safe. But I will suggest that if other AI robots are been coded to make other AI robots I will be more better because we are in the advanced century so the work most not be only done by humans .
I agree because... if the robot has not been tested or checked it should not be in the workplaces, rather it can be in a room which stores unused devices or a specific room for the robot.
I think since it's a workplace, the owner of the factory could have arranged a place in the building for medical people, in case of a medical situation, in a similar way to the worker who got injured by the robot.
This a very tough choice because on one hand I think that the company who developed the AI is responsible for the accident as they should always ensure that their product is completely safe before they sell it to other companies(a).
On the other hand, I think that the owner of Techsolves is responsible because their job is to keep their workers safe at all times even if nothing has ever gone wrong with the technology before.They should remember that there is always a first time at everything. The owner should never have used this particular product in his business if there was any risk at all of an accident or anyone getting hurt(b).
After considering all the pros and cons, I think that b is the option that I agree with most.
One person that I don't think is responsible at all is the worker who got hurt. The accident isn't their fault at all because they couldn't have been more careful when it comes to dangerous matters like robots and electronics and they would never have wanted to get hurt so it is in no way their fault.
I like the way you outlined your thought process!
I'm not sure about this because I disagree because if someone else had manufactured the AI robot, there could have been the chance that the robot wouldn't have made the accident, so I agree with option A the most. But then again, what you said about option B being the best option, and how the owner should have just used common sense and keep the people safe is something I also agree with
As the company is labeled Techsolves, it should solve problems and not make. The malfunction means that it wasn't properly built from the company. The owner wasn't there , just gave the approval according to what the company workers suggested. But we need to make sure that when we are using theses machines, people working there should be safe and be trained to stop using machines that malfunction.
Hi, friendly song
I solemnly agree with you in a high scale of preseptive, why because yes for example of a company which you used in your comment, the company called Techsolves, which as you said is a company that deals with the aspects of fixing and creating of AI powdered bots.
So when it comes to who is the cause of an accident that happens at work, we all should know that it comes from the producer or even possiblely can be hacked where by it will be done because of evil or selfish needs to cause harm or danger to the company and even the individuals in the building. So looking at it, they should (the programmers) probably increase the security levels of the program, of the AI bots so as to make sure that the bots are free from being hacked to prevent danger from happening, and to keep the individuals safe for any cyber danger to protect them from different forms of attacks in the company where the AI bots work as well as the individuals.
Thanks.
I think option A is the best option because the company that are developing the AI should know about it. They should know about its merits and demerits also. If they are developing AI then they should know how to control it and they should hire professionals who should know how to control it when they malfunction. They should only keep AI where they can function easily and they can do better than humans. For example: they should not put AI in school because if it malfunctions then it will harm the children of school. I agree with option C also. The workers need to worry about themselves it's their fault if they are careless. If they were not careless then the AI would not harm them.
In my opinion i would like to do agree with A and C. The A who said that the company that developed AI is responsible. Yes they are responsible because they have developed AI and they should be responsible for this also. I agree with that AI can help in our work instead of a one man but AI can't be replace in a man place. C had said that the worker who had got hurt is Responsible for not being careful this is so good line in my opinion the worker is responsible is for this. He/ she can decide how can you get hurt. What work can hurt them .
I'm not sure about this because... you can never tell whether it is based on a bug with the AI that caused the civilian to get hurt or if it was carelessness based on the path of the citizen . I will go for option B for both ; because the owner of tech-solves should be aware of every activity going on in his / her company ; because whether it was the fault of the civilian or not , the owner will either have to figure out the bug if it was the fault of the AI or also cover up for the treatment of the civilian if it was the civilians fault ; to avoid the loss of workers due to someone getting hurt in his / her company.
I think you can actually find out who is at fault. Bugs don't just come and then disappear immediately, do they? they stay there and if they are not taken care of they will get worse. If someone gets hurt while using the AI a simple system diagnostics will help find the problem. On the other hand if the worker is at fault, the AI won't be shown to have any bugs. It was simply the employee who was being careless. An AI uses the concept of garbage in garbage out. This means if someone mediocre handles it, the result it will give will also be mediocre.
I'm not sure about this because... yeah, bugs don't just come and disappear immediately. But what if the system gets hacked or something? From my research some problems caused by bugs are as a result of external interference with the program's performance that was not anticipated or planned by the developer/programmer. And if I'm not wrong, hacking into the AI's system is obviously an external interference that is totally most times not done or planned by the developer. So, the AI's system gets hacked, it starts to malfunction and then causes harm to employees in the company and someway somehow that is supposed to be the employee's fault?!
Basically, I feel it's not entirely the company or the employee's fault because, if we're still on the issue of the system getting hacked it cannot be blamed entirely on the company nor the employee.
I agree with what they're saying because it's not always the Ai's fault it could be the person's fault or there could be a hacker.
I disagree because the company should and must take full responsibility for the AI because they have introduced it. The robot should be failproof so that no hacker can hack it. Even if it is the person's fault, the person may be able to compensate for it. If not, it is the work of the judiciary to solve the issues. A robot is merely a machine created by humans and it does not have the right to take the fundamental rights of any person.
Actually all what you said could some how be true, but for it all the fault is on the creator of the Ai bots . Why I say so is because if the creator of the Ai bots probably they will be a very low risk of it being attack by hackers and also there will be a very low risk of it being malfunctioning while is on work or during any point in time.
So in conclusion the actually fault of any Ai malfunction is on the creator's head or hands so the creators should be more precise in the building of the Ai bots. Thanks.
Sorry for the in completed essay. Here is the full version of the essay . I agree with you witty_ cheetah , but in my opinion I agree with with both option A and option C. In option A, the responsibility lies with the owner of the talent to ensure proper programming of the robot, emphasizing the importance of programming to prevent misuse or harm. Additionally, option C highlights the human tendency to sometimes mistreat robots when they do not perform as expected, leading to potential retaliatory behavior from the robot. It is essential to acknowledge these factors and approach the development and use of technology with ethical considerations in mind. Thank you.🙂
I'm not sure about this because... I think that A would be more responsible because company has developed the ai and it's their responsibility that AI should work properly if AI can't be managed then they should not kept in the workplace.
I agree because... It not always the AI's fault, it is sometimes hackers programmers etc.
I'm not sure about this because... If the person give the robot extra security what will happen
Personally ,
I feel like A is not completely response for the problem concerning ai because I feel like the only reason ai can as developed was for the greater good of humans
They had a great Intention for the use of ai but the individuals tht tend to use ai in a negative way is response for what they do not the developers
This just my personal opinion about your answer
I agree because they agree that AI could be good for humans because some people can use AI for bad use .
People cannot like ai because people can hack into the bot and people may think that it's something and then the bot could get the person's personal things. Like finding their address, hacking their facebook,finding their face, or stealing their voice and using it for other things.
I totally agree with your point of view. First of all, the option A is by far the best option to rely on. The company is be responsible for all the works of development of AI. The company must have checked AI carefully with covering of defects and potential circumstances that can be created by AI. But when it comes, to the defects, it may blame employees whereas it may take the credit of making a new useful invention if anything usefull was created.Thats my view about Option A. It might be controversial but yes it is what I think.
About option C, yes the employee who got injured must had to more careful. But Option A is comparitively reasonable. Its juat my opinion.
What do you think?
I agree with the saying that both opinions a and c are responsible, While artificial intelligence (AI) systems have the prospective to boost the workplace – for example by improving workplace safety – if not designed or executed well, they also pose risks to workers’ fundamental rights and well-being over and above any impression on the number of employment . For example , AI systems could standardize human biases in workplace choice. Moreover, it is always fuzzy whether workers are interacting with an AI system or with a real human, decisions made through AI systems can be tough to understand, and it is often indefinite as to who is responsible if anything goes wrong when AI systems are used in the workplace.
These risks, joined with the fast pace of AI development and deployment, underscore the crucial need for policy plotters to move briskly and thrive policies to make sure that AI used in the workplace is trustworthy. Following the OECD AI Principles, “trustworthy AI” means that the development and use of AI is safe and respectful of fundamental rights such as privacy, fairness, and labor rights and that the way it gets to employment-related choice is indisputable and understandable by humans. It also means that employers, workers, and job seekers are made mindful of and are glass-like about their use of AI and that it is obvious who is accountable if something goes wrong. thank you
I agree with you honorable_wilddog, the reason being is that every organization is always responsible for the well being of their employees in the workspace, moreover, if the robots will eventually turn out to malfunction, it shouldn't have been placed at the workplace, because it is not safe, and the employees are supposed to be in a safe environment whiles working.
With the option C, I also agree with you, this is because if most of the time the company uses AI, and things happened without a problem, that means that the employee might have been the cause of the robot malfunction. Because the robot will not malfunction out of the blue after doing a lot of things in the company for a long period of time.
I don't really agree with this.. because it might be a bug and the people who made the robots might have had nothing to do with it so the people who made it might get blamed for something they did not do and the world does not want people who are innocent get arrested so this is a bit of a bad idea but I do get where this is coming from because maybe they did do something wrong and do a mistake with the programing
I agree because... The entire company is responsible for the AI ,as everyone contributes to its design and construction. If the AI cannot be managed it shouldn't stay in workplaces. I also strongly disagree with point C because workers are not the main culprit bringing the AI to the workplace and they cannot predict accidents.
Workers shouldn't be blamed for accidents instead, I think the creators of the AI are accountable. They should have identified errors or mistakes right from the start of production.
I agree because... It's true the workers aren't the culprit, everyone makes mistakes it could be a flaw in the coding, and AI can't be tested in conceived areas it needs a lot of space to work and you need a lot of protection for the testing. I can't entirely disagree with option C because the workers aren't the culprit the workers are just doing their jobs not creating anything big.
Thank you.
I agree 👍 in your opinion, because we the humans (scientists)are responsible because they are the ones that developed and designed for us to be a betterment for the world. AI help in different ways like in the aspect of learning, working, in medical issues, in some labor works and so on. Yes AI can't be replaced by man in terms of teaching the students, because they students will understand the teacher more than the AI machines. Also AI don't have the emotion,creativity and have the zeal to do any work more than humans. In athletes games, if an AI machine are asked to run a race, it will get to a point it will break down and malfunction, but when a human is asked to run it will have the zeal of winning the game (race).C had said that the worker who had got hurt is Responsible for not being careful this is so good line in my opinion the worker is responsible is for this. He/ she can decide how can you get hurt. What work can hurt them .
Thanks.
I agree with you to an extent that humans will teach students better than AI because of the emotions, creativity and zeal to teach and impact knowledge and morals to the students.
The one I disagree with you is when you said that the worker is responsible for his actions don't you think that the company is responsible for the AI malfunction because it was the company who invented and developed the AI.
So my question here is the company still to blame or the worker who was just following the instructions given to him?
You and I don't agree. Alright, so what if the process of creating AI was a complete success? Humans, or scientists, ensured that errors were avoided. AI will ultimately start to slowly lose one or more components and start to act differently. As you pointed out, when an AI machine is expected to run a race in an athlete game, it will eventually malfunction and break. You know, this happened at a point, without human error. Furthermore, neither of them alone is responsible for the worker's lack of caution; rather, both of them at times can be responsible differently at different situations. So, the humans should be careful and workers should keep the AI robot in place.
Personally ,I disagree with opinion C. I don't think the workers are responsible for being hurt because the AI bot malfunctioned, making the situation accidental (unexpected). Even though some workers don't carefully use the AI bot it doesn't make them responsible for their misfortune, it is the people who created it that are responsible the workers who didn't carefully use it are at fault.
I disagree because... In my view, I agree with person A, who mentioned that the company developing AI should take responsibility. Just like when we buy a car, the manufacturer is responsible for its safety. Similarly, the creators of AI should ensure it's used ethically. However, saying the worker is solely responsible for getting hurt might not cover all situations. For instance, think about a construction worker; they're careful, but if they're given faulty equipment, it's not just their responsibility if something goes wrong. It's about creating a safe environment for everyone. And there's more to the AI story. Imagine AI being used in hospitals. The responsibility isn't just on the developers; doctors and policymakers also come into play. Doctors need to trust the AI diagnoses, and policymakers set the rules to make sure it's used properly.
Now, back to the worker side of things. Picture a factory worker. They might be careful, but if they're not given the right training for new machines, accidents can happen. This highlights how important it is for companies to give workers the right skills to handle new technology safely.
So, when it comes to AI, it's like a group effort. Developers, workers, policymakers, and even users need to work together. Real-life stories show that shared responsibility is key to making AI work for everyone while keeping things safe and ethical.
I have a different view about this, I think I will go with A as the comment I agree the most with because, I feel the developer should be blamed because probably there is something they didn't get right during the programming or they failed to allow the AI get acquainted with some possible human behaviors especially during upgrade and fixing bugs, so the AI could have seen the person as a possible threat.
For the option of least I agree with I would say option c, my reason being that, the company trusted what the developer had programmed and started using it with the hope that it was probably safe and work friendly! I know it is the duty of the employer to make sure the work place is totally safe, but sometimes they might not be aware because they have full trust in the robot.
honorable wilddog
I agree because... options A and C are the most common reasons there can be an AI accident. It can either be the operator's fault or the developing company fault because, if the developer has done every thing that He or She is supposed to do there won't have been any accident.
According to option C, the occurrence of the accident might have been because of the misuse of the operator or the incorrect order that is given to the AI. That is why it is always advisable to read and understand the usage manuals before operating any type of machines.
I disagree because...
Although a the company who made AI in general might seem like they could be held responsible but as you have read they are not the one who created that specific robot therefore the person/company who made that should be held responsible and also -going into more reasoning- the person who honorable wilddog said was responsible the one who hurt themselves I don't believe because if they hurt themselves on a normal day of work, they can't just run away if they don't know whats happening so when the robot hurt her/he the person/company should be the ones that should be held responsible.
That is why I went with option B
Thank you.
I agree with option A. The company that built the AI is responsible because it developed the AI. We should all be accountable for our actions. The AI should be tested more than thrice to make sure they're safe for usage so that if they malfunction, it won't be the fault of the developers but that of the users. According to option C, users of AI should also be careful while using AI. They should bear in mind that AI isn't perfect and can malfunction. To make the AI last longer though, they should avoid dust and water coming in contact with it.
Thank you.
I disagree with you honorable wildog, in your opinion C is not encouraging, individuals will be a lot of pains at the point of that injury period, so blaming them is like making them feel inferior. Inferiority complete can lead to anxiety so we should not blame the ones injured.
I can't fully agree with you because I believe that innovation involves making mistakes, trial and error, and acknowledging that there's always a chance of something going wrong. Blaming the company is justified if the error was overlooked. However, an issue can only be addressed if we recognize and acknowledge it. This should serve as a learning opportunity for the company, and if this mistake repeats I believe the company should be held accountable. The worker should have been careful knowing that a machine may have bugs and errors too.
I agree with you communicative engine , as we all know Ai was made for our comfort . To make it completely, there will be always some problems . If once got the solutions to these issues, Ai can be very useful . As there are always some hurdles which needs to be crossed before achieving success , in the same way Ai also works .
Also anyone can make mistakes, so we should move ahead and defeat more and more hurdles ……….
I respectfully challenge honorable wilddog because blaming the person that got will not help the case I believe that its not the workers fault because its the company, because although the worker might have built it he was given orders.
I humbly disagree with you based on what you said about C because it's not actually their fault because sometimes they will not know that it is hurtful since it's all known that AI is a helping instrument that helps to improve our everyday life and activities so they might think it's not hurting and therefore handle it as if it's their friend so if it hurts them sometimes it's their fault.
Actually, what you are saying is true but, I hope you are aware that most AI have there own specific duties and activities to do as they are assign to do duties form there own potential.
So in conclusion what I am trying to say is that what so ever accident done by AI is the fault of the creators and also remember that AI are assign to their own specific responsibility as one AI bots. Thanks.
I'm not sure about this because... The act or saying that it is the cause of the creator is not actually right towards my own perspective, why because it's high possibility to be hacked is seriously or rather a fact whereby it can be truly hacked, it may cause serious accident or danger towards the workers or even the people in the particular location where the accident may have oocured or occur.
So In conclusion, don't you think that accident may actually be done or caused by hackers? Thanks.
Actually from my own understanding, I don't concur with your reasoning why because, if the AI are being able to be hacked isn't it the cause of the creator? Whereby he or she did not input the right security softwares whereby it will be easy to be hacked by unknown hackers which actually for me is really possible.
So in conclusion, I hope you have been able to be convinced about, the fault all lays on the creator's and not on any one else. Thanks.
I can agree with your choice but I can't totally agree. I agree with (A) because the company that developed the AI could have made the robot a bit safer so like you said the company that developed the AI is responsible, but I have a few different thoughts about (C). you are right saying that the worker is responsible for not being careful, but also it could be an accident. Many people have accidents. So yeah I hope you understand what i'm saying
Hello,
I disagree because the company should be the one responsible in this case. I think this is because the programmer is not 100% sure if it is working right. Probably for the beginning, it will work perfectly but when it starts to take time working that's the point where it's going to go crazy. The robot should have multiple tries in different situations and they should verify if it's working correctly. Even if the person wasn't being careful it's not 100% the worker's fault. A robot is created by a human and some robots that don't work correctly can have their control of themselves.
I'm not sure about this because I agreed with you in the beginning with choice A but not C. I say this because I believe that the worker is there to do his or her job and not watch out somebody else. The worker should feel safe in that environment and not like they have to constantly stop working to check if anything is coming their way. It's either the worker is doing it's job or making sure he or she is safe. Personally I believe they should do their job and the person in charge should be held accountable for any damages unless the person who got hurt got themselves hurt on purpose.
Option C seems to be the one with which I agree the least since I believe that the worker is not to blame for the machine's safety, even if it is his fault. Instead, it is better to concentrate on the problems that will ensure the safety of both the worker and the machine.
EXCITED TO SEE CORRECTIONS
Regards
I probably would not say so. I would pick either A or B as C is not an option to me. But think about a normal factory.. when a worker gets hurt by a piece of machinery, people usually blame the company for not keeping their equipment safe. Similarly in this high-tech future company, when a robot malfunctions and injures a worker, the owner of Techsolves should be held accountable. As the owner has the ultimate decision-making power in the company, he is the one who decided to purchase the AI-included machinery and using it in the workplace. That's why he got all the responsibility for the consequences of that decision.
I think they will still have schools but will be on a computer as now they have AI .
i think that i agree with a because if it isn't safe then they shouldn't keep it and they one hundred percent should not sell it to anyone or make any duplicates of it if it can hurt people although it would have been safer if the person who got hurt also stepped out of the way when they noticed that the robot was malfunctioning instead of staying where they were and getting hurt so even though a is a very good option and i believe it i also think that c is true
In my opinion,the malfunction isn't anyone's fault.It was an honest mistake,which no one should be blamed for.Don't you agree?
Hi, thanks for your contribution! This is definitely an interesting take. However, if there is no one to blame, the victims of potential AI malfunctioning errors will always be people, and not the company who are creating and benefiting from AI products. Would you agree? In a sense, this means that the AI companies may be able to create risky products as push them to the market as they won't be held to account for risks coming out of their products?
Hello,
In the case of malfunctioning, there is no way we can say that the fault is from nobody, I have experienced AI malfunctioning, I tried to do some homework with the snapchat AI's and the thing suddenly started replying to me in Russian. In such a case can we say it is nobody's fault?
I once heard about a story at Jupiter hospital at Florida, they tried to use AI's to cure cancer but it did not work out as planned because of AI's malfunctioning, in this case to can we say it is nobody's fault?
It is so glaringly obvious that in the two points I stated above that the AI companies are at fault.
If companies create risky products and push them to the market, the disadvantage is still to them. Why? because they would succeed in damaging the fast-building good name of "artificial intelligence". Which could make people loathe AI's which could make them go out of business.
THANK YOU
You are absolutely correct. I never thought about it that way.
I think A because it s the company fault if the workspace is unsafe then you should not work there. The company made the AI so it is responible. I also agree with C because if he hurt himself then he isnt being carefull.
I think that the owner of Techsolves is responsible because the owner should keep the staff safe at all time. They are responsible for checking the upkeep of all equipment that the staff use. C is the option I agree with less because the company they work for should be in charge - it's not their fault if there has been a malfunction.
I understand your point resourceful_meteor.
That's the reason I strongly agree with you. It's important for employers to prioritize the safety of their staff and provide a secure working environment. The owner of Techsolves should indeed take responsibility for ensuring the upkeep of equipment and addressing any potential malfunctions. However, it's also worth considering that sometimes unforeseen accidents or malfunctions can occur despite proper maintenance. In those cases, it might not necessarily be the fault of the company or the employees. It's a complex situation, but I agree that the company should take steps to keep their staff safe. Safety should always be a top priority!You're right, the owner of Techsolves has a responsibility to keep their staff safe. They should regularly check the equipment and ensure proper maintenance. However, accidents can happen even with the best precautions in place. In those cases, it might not be the fault of the company or the employees. It's important for the company to have protocols in place to address any malfunctions or accidents promptly. Safety should always be a priority, and it's a shared responsibility between the company and the employees.
I agree that the owner should try to keep the staff safe but one person even if he is the CEO but it's pretty hard to be at multiple places at once, also one person cant keep everyone safe someone is bound to get hurt no matter the time or place. Also you can't tell when bugs can make the A.I malfunctions no matter how advance robots can get it will never be like a human.
I agree because... Any accident that happens in the company it is, the responsibility of the manufacturer but still thinking it can also be the fault of some hackers who tends to highjack the AI bots for their own selfish needs? Don't you think so just saying because now, most of days hackers are becoming more experienced in that third aspects. Thanks
I agree with the opinions a and b. I also disagree with opinion c. I agree with these opinions, because I feel that the company if responsible due to the company owning these machines and coding them. If the company coded them correctly; I am pretty sure no one would have gotten injured. This would be very irreponsible if the company did not make sure that the AI was safe. To add on, I feel as if its not the employes' fault, because the organization should have made sure that they were safe before letting the machine by workers. Also, the company owner should check the robot daily for malfunctions.
I agree with you on some parts, but I don't think that option B is a reasonable response. I think this because, the company that took use of the AI probably wouldn't have known that the AI had a malfunction. Like you said, if the company coded them correctly, there wouldn't be any accident. So wouldn't it be safe to assume that Techsolves thought the same?
Hello,
I also agree with options A and B and disagree with option C, for the same reasons. The company should have taken the time to make sure their product was safe to have around humans before releasing it to tech companies. People do make mistakes but robots don't, so the mistake falls on the programmers. It could be a hardware malfunction which is most likely no one's fault, but they should try their best to prevent those types of malfunctions. I also believe the owner of Techsolve does have a portion of that responsibility to make sure that equipment that their workers are around is as safe as possible, and I mean "as possible" because sometimes the job itself is dangerous.
I agree with both opinions A and B. The company and owner are responsible for this, since they haven't taken the time to check if the AI is safe. However, I think the owner should take more blame because they are the biggest leader in the company and they are most likely the one who made it. They can easily ask for more testing to be done, but they didn't and now they have to pay the price.
I completely agree with you. The owner should be compensating the worker and making the AI better, since they were the one who came up with the idea and is the one who didn't test the AI first. The company should then handle the issue themselves and the CEO.
I agree with option A the most because the company who developed the A.I. should know whether or not the A.I. is safe enough to sell to other businesses who need them. Techsolves the company who purchased the A.I. is most likely not aware of the issues with A.I. and if they are it is not their fault for being sold defective A.I.. And it is most definitely not the employees fault because they were most likely not informed that the A.I. may not function properly.
I agree most in order withA, C ,and B
The idea that we place responsibility on a robot, in my opinion, is wrong because a robot is something that has been programmed by a person to perform a specific tasks. Therefore, to determine exactly who is responsible, we must look at the cause of the person’s injury. Did a sudden malfunction occur in the robot due to an error in its programming? In this case, the responsibility lies with the programmer or the robot’s manufacturer. But if the robot is performing its work normally and a person is injured due to his interference in the robot’s work, then the person responsible is the injured person
I agree with A the most because the company created the AI and it's their responsibility to make sure that the robots work well and don't malfunction and they shouldn't allow anything potentially unsafe in a work space.
I strongly agree to option C because the responsibility for workplace safety lies with both the company and the workers. When it comes to AI, companies have a responsibility to thoroughly test and ensure the safety of their technology before implementing it in workplaces. However, it's also important for workers to be trained on how to use AI systems properly and to follow safety guidelines. Collaboration between companies, workers, and regulatory bodies is crucial to ensure that AI technologies are safe and beneficial in the workplace. It's a shared responsibility to create a safe working environment when implementing new technologies. So, "The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe!"
I disagree because,
your last sentence makes it seem that you agree with option A. It is the company's fault first because they produced the AI and released it to the public. It is only reasonable to pick option C with more context; Was it heavy machinery? Was it hard to get out of the way of, or was it easy? You really need more context. If the employee was minding their own business and the AI decided to attack, the last person to blame would be the victim. Although, I see where you would be coming from if the context was that the employee was in the way, and could've easily gotten out of it.
I feel like the company that developed the AI is responsible because it was not programmed well and to do what it was programmed to do. It can be used in workplaces after it has gone through multiple tests to confirm that it is suitable and functioning properly. For instance, we have self driving cars now. If it happens to get into an accident, the company should be taken to court not the owner of the car. The company should also cover the insurance of the car to replace the other one that was involved in the accident. Even in companies that AI is used, it could injure one of the workers but this time around it would be the owner of the company not the developer of the AI. They would have to pay for their hospital bill. But the fault comes from the developers of the AI.
In this situation, I strongly believe that the responsibility lies with Option B: "The owner of Techsolves is responsible." The owner has the primary duty to ensure a safe workplace, and it's their obligation to keep all workers safe, especially when using AI technology.
However, I'm less inclined to agree with Option C: "The worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful." While individual responsibility matters, putting the blame solely on the worker may overlook potential issues in safety measures, training, or the technology itself. We need to establish a workplace environment that not only encourages individual caution but also ensures comprehensive safety measures and support for employees interacting with AI technology.
Thank You!!!
I disagree because,
although I can kind of see where you are coming from, the most logical answer would be option A. I feel like most of the responsibility lies with the company that produced the AI. I love how you worded your response and dealed with disagreeing to option C, although I feel like option A is the one that is most logical to agree with.
Thanks!
I vehemently agree with you in the sense that, when there is an AI accident, do not look at the worker. Although yes sometimes it may be the fault of the worker due to careless handling because the worker may not have the right and full knowledge about AI. But we should also look at the programmer. If the programmer does not program the AI bot well, there might be lots of accidents and failures. So in order to stop this, they programmers should program the AI bots well. And there should be lots of screening to ensure efficiency.
I totally agree with option A that the company shouldn't have placed the AI in a workplace while it was not completely safe. I believe that AI technology has been a great help in working filed, but it can be dangerous at the same time if it's not verified properly. And I disagree with option C because the worker would be clueless about the defect in the robot.
I mostly agree with option A because in the beginning we said that one of the reasons for the invention of AI to help us humans in our daily works so that it will be faster and easier.
Now, when there presence in our midst curses an accident, it is the fault of the company that has developed it because they should know better that it is not supposed to be in work places if they are not completely safe, how can what we tend to help us turn back to hurting us.
I agree because if we have AI as our future, the people who make the robots have to make them very safe to live with not harmful.
I want to agree with A . We know that Al is also like a robot. Every robot should go through a lot of planning and testing. If there is a problem with Al or the crew due to a lack of planning and testing, the fault must lie with the robot that created it. Just as happened in the above incident. So I think that Techsolves company itself is the main cause of injury of Techsolves company employee. Hope, I have presented my opinion correctly.
Thanks.
The opinion I agree with the most is A. The company that developed AI is responsible.They create the robot , so aren't they responsible? If AI is our future, wouldn't you like to live knowing it is safe?If AI is our future, then living with the risk of AI being hurtful is very worrying.The company who makes AI should be able to make the robot kind and friendly.They are the people responsible.
In my opinion, I agree with A the most because the developers of the AI are responsible since they designed and developed the AI itself, and it shouldn't be malfunctioning in the first place. But I disagree with B the most, since the company cannot control how to prevent the AI itself from malfunctioning. As far as C is concerned, I think that the employees can be a little more careful and cautious of the AI, but it can't possibly be their fault if the AI is malfunctioning.
I agree with both A and C, my reasoning to C is that the worker, knowing that there is AI there, should already know to be careful and always be on the lookout as it is very obvious that AI, robots, machines, or anything with technology built into it can malfunction at any time without warning. Although it was also the worker's fault, I think the focus should be put onto the company. I think this because the AI was implemented into the workplace along with the human employees, which were at a risk of being hurt if the company did not make sure the AI was picture perfect. This also supports with my idea of not making AI do jobs that us humans currently do since making something perfect is impossible, meaning it would be safer and more logical to use humans for the job instead of artificial intelligence. The company was a greater fault in this incident, but a thing I have to say about B is that if it is a company using AI, I can infer that it is a rich company that strives to keep their workers safe, in which they failed here, but it said that the AI almost never malfunctions, meaning this company already keeps their workers safe, thats why I disagree with B. In general, I just think AI should not be implemented into workspaces that also help theirselves to the use of human workers as well, the company in this case, was severely irresponsible, not for making the AI, but for using it in a workspace that uses human workers as well, because the company knew that the AI wouldn't be perfect, and there still was a chance of it malfunctioning, meaning the company is at fault not for anything else but inserting the AI into a workspace that has humans working in it as well.
I respectfully disagree with you because the worker can't predict the future to know when the AI will malfunction. AI systems, despite rigorous testing, can still encounter unforeseen issues or errors. Putting all the blame on workers to expect and stop these glitches ignores how complicated AI is and that both workers and bosses should keep the workplace safe together.
I think its B the most because the company leader should check their equipment so that it's safe
I think it is C the least because the worker had no idea that the AI would malfunction
I strongly agree with opinion A because, the company that develop the AI did not make sure that the AI was safe for testing that's why i said the company is at fault for not checking the AI.
For me the correct is ether A or B. I don't think we cam blame the worker. As you state the robot malfunctioned which means something didn' t work well. So, something wasn't properly placed or tested well enough. How can we blame the worker? He didn't made the robot and he didn't use it wrongly. It is just a machine that maybe something went wrong in its program.
I agree with you. The company is responsible as it should have double checked if everything functioned well. They give the directions and they are responsible if everything works well.
Even, if the worker didn't know how to use it maybe the company didn't train him well enough.
In this situation I would pick statement B"The owner of Tech solves is responsible. They should keep all workers safe at all times." I agree with this statement because when you are working with AI you never know, it may malfunction or anything can go wrong at any time. This is why I think the owner should always be around the workers making sure nothing goes wrong so they will be safe.
On the other hand , I completely disagree with Option C: "The worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful." I don't agree with this as it is not a workers fault that AI has malfunctioned. This should be responsible for the owner for not being careful about their workers while they are working with AI. It may not be a workers fault that AI malfunctions.
Lastly , I partly agree with statement A: "The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe!" It may or may not be the company's fault because they might not have tested it on the correct things or something that didn't seem to work. It maybe part of the owners if they didn't check it properly or it maybe the workers fault as they might of pressed something they shouldn't have or have done something wrong.This is why I think we need workers to fully train to know how to use AI accurately and safely.
Thank you.
The company that developed the AI is responsible to some extent because it is there software and creation that malfunctioned but obviously you can't put the complete blame on them because the whole point of AI is to learn itself and possibly reprogram itself in certain circumstances.
The owner of Techsolves also might have something do with it rests upon the shoulders of the company's owner to keep his employees safe while under his watch.
But again the person should have been more cautious while handling the machinery so there is a possibility that he himself was also responsible for his injury.
After pondering a lot on the situation and put myself in the shoes of all three of them I think it is safe to say that no one person can be blamed here and everyone may have a different approach to look at the situation.
In this case, I have the upper hand with option B. Techsolves' owner is accountable for ensuring the safety of workers and a secure work environment.
Undoubtedly. The responsibility for workplace safety is entrusted to the owner of Techsolves in Option B. The responsibility for AI-driven technology goes beyond development. The owner is required to establish comprehensive safety protocols, conduct routine maintenance assessments, and provide adequate training to employees who work with AI systems.
Those who own companies that are using advanced AI and technology should establish comprehensive safety protocols, conduct risk assessments, and prioritize continuous monitoring to prevent malfunctions and minimize potential harm
I think B because they should be ready if something like that happened.
Can you say a bit more, noble_saxophone?
ln my opinion i would like to agree with A and B . Here are my 2 reasons.
.The company who owns Techsolves need to keep everyone and things safe otherwise there would be no point of having a work place when it 's completely not safe for anyone
.They need to look out for mistakes so nothing go 's very wrong
THANKS FOR READING !!!!!!
Interesting discussion – It's very clear that we are in 2044, AI is used for numerous tasks, and typically, operations proceed smoothly without a problem. I would say all three are responsible, more than that this is highly complex, and a detailed analysis of various factors, including the circumstances of the incident is essential.
Even if the worker's actions played a role in the incident, the responsibility for the malfunction and resulting harm may still be shared among multiple parties, including the company that designed and developed it or the company using it for 20 + years, their negligence or actions also contributed to the incident. Ultimately, determining responsibility in cases of robot malfunctions and resulting harm often requires a detailed investigation and analysis of the facts and legal principles involved. until examined, and validated - In my opinion I see all the 3 are responsible.
I agree with A and B, because as a manufacturer of AI robots the company must ensure that the robot has been tested in every way to conclude that it is fit to be in any establishment, in many cases the company be sued if anything goes wrong. I also blame the owner of techsolves because as a owner of a company you ought to ensure that your workers are safe at all times in every way.
hello!
I think that whoever built the AI should be responsible because if they did something wrong while building the AI it is there fault because AI would not be allowed if the people who made it said it is save and if it was not save the owners would say it is not save so it should be the owners of the AI's fault.Thank you for listening.
In my own thought, I would go with option A and option B because... What ever the AI does either good or bad would be the fault of the company because the company which develops AI should be very strict with safety precautions such as having the AI well programmed in order not to cause damages and in option B the finished products lies in the hands of the tech solves and if they feel reluctant about it,this might cause a lot of damage, I mean good management brings forth good results and if they are able to cooperate with the workers, for sure they'll get a good result.
Thank you.
I agree with answer (a) the most .I agree with it the most because if you make something for people to enjoy you should always check it. If it is not safe then you shouldn't put it out into the world. So I think you should blame the head of the company for not keeping their colleague safe.
I agree with you charming_power. I also think that if an AI is not safe, it should not even be sold to any customers. If the AI was safe , the head of the company should also check whether the AI is working regularly. I agree with your point that said:' you should blame the head of the company for not keeping their college safe' because I think it should always be the head of the company who tries their best to keep their college safe at all times. After all, the college is still human and the head of the company should not give the college different treatment than to other colleges.
Hi there!
I agree with option A. In the event of an AI accident, responsibility lies with the company that developed the AI, as they are accountable for ensuring its safety. The deployment of AI in workplaces should adhere to rigorous safety standards and undergo thorough testing to minimize the risk of accidents. Companies must prioritize the development of AI systems that are not only technologically advanced but also designed with robust safety mechanisms. Striking a balance between innovation and safety is crucial to prevent unintended consequences and uphold the ethical use of AI in various settings.
If we let AI drive cars then no one will be responsible and the person who got injured won't even figure out who hurt them and won't get punished. In my opinion cars like Tesla are not very good even though they are electric and good for the environment some people make them self drive.
In my opinion if a accident happens on an electric car that drives on its own I think that the president should go and have a TALK with the person or people who made the car .I think that a car should be driven by itself beacuse the person that is driving it knows ecactly where they going FULL STOP
I personally would vote for 2 options (Option A and option C):
Option A states "The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe!"
My Reply to option A: I personally would choose this option because we humans are the ones that make AI not and are responsible for the programs being installed in AI, so if there is any malfunction it may be possibly be from the programmers either because they gave the machine a wrong code or gave it a different use than it was built to do.
Option C states"The worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful. It’s no different to if they hurt themselves some other way."
My Reply to option C: I also chose this option because option A and C work hand in hand, because it is possible that the worker or user is not using the machine properly but is trying to force it to do what it is not programmed to do. So I think that the users should first be able to know how to properly use the AI machine.
THANK YOU.
I agree with C because the worker should not have been out of the way of the robot and sould of been more careful with dealing with the robot
I disagree because what if they worker was told that nothing bad would happen? If your working with any type of machine, it should be clarified if the machine is harmful or if its completely safe. If the worker was not informed that the machine was harmful, they wouldn't have known that the accident was on the way. In highlight, if the worker was told that the machine can malfunction and harm someone, then yes they should have been careful. Otherwise, it is not the worker's fault if the accident happened but the machine was classified as being completely safe for the work environment.
I agree with A and B. The company is responsible for anything that occurs with their product. The company cannot control everything that happens with the AI. But, if you make a product and sell it it should be safe. When your product is not safe the company should pay the price It is their mistake and the need to be held accountable. It is also the owner of the Techsolves fault they mostly gave the green light to purchase the AI. Techsolves are a business so the workplace should be a safe environment for their workers. Worker safe should be a top priority to Techsolves. I don't agree with C because it specifically states that the AI malfunctions. The worker didn't misuse the technology, so Techsolves and the company of the AI are responsible.
In my opinion option 'C' is corrrect because they made Ai so, they should be given responsibility if any problem occurs.It's imp for companies to prioritize the safety of AI in the workplaces. As AI tech is advancing, it is imp for companies to test every code or something related to it to ensure the safety and reliability of AI systems before applying them in workplace. There are potential risks in the implement of Ai so, they must provide proper training and guidance for employees to work with the new tech'. By taking these types of precautions, companies can create a safe and productive working environment for the staffs working there. Safety should always be a top priority whether it is in tech or any ethical thing !! Thankyou ✨
Hi,
In my own opinion I agree with opinion A because since their the company who made the AI they are supposed to make sure that the AI is working fine and it shouldn't malfunction. I disagree with opinion C because the worker didn't know that the AI was going to malfunction because he/she was already use to the AI not malfunctioning.
i agree with your opinion A, but i quite disagree in C being wrong. Even if it is company's mistake, workers should be careful around AI at all times, because even if the chances are low, AI could malfunction just like regular machines.
Hi!!,
- I agree with Option A because The company that developed the AI technology should ensure its safety before deploying it in workplaces, and they bear responsibility if it malfunctions and causes harm.
- I partially agree with Option B because,While employers do have a responsibility to keep their workers safe, the ultimate responsibility for the malfunctioning AI technology likely lies with the company that developed or manufactured it.
- I disagree with Option C because Placing sole responsibility on the injured worker overlooks potential issues with the AI technology itself or with the employer's duty to provide a safe working environment.
Thank you!!...
Personally speaking, I would agree with opinion A. I think the problem is rooted from the developer company because it should have ensured that the robot is safe and might not develop harmful actions or tempers. I partially disagree with opinion B. The manager is a bit responsible for the hurt. The manager 's aim to bring the robot was to help his workers in their works. However, he should have ensured that the robot he brought is safe and doesn't pose hazard to his workers. Opinion C. may be regarded from two perspectives. The first one assumes that the robot wasn't programmed correctly, in this case the worker isn't responsible for being hurt, because Ai robots doesn't have feeling, so if we proposed that the worker have made something wrong or criticized the robot, the robot doesn't have feelings to describe this action as an offense and respond to this action severely. The second one, is if the robot was working properly, then the total responsibility lies on the worker, because he might have made something wrong in dealing with the robot, so he should be careful while working.
In my opinion I think B is the answer because the owner should keep the workers safe at all times and keeping the equipment appropriate for the assistants
I think I would not agree with point A because the company would not purchase that AI from another company if it hasn't passed a safety test or is very useful for their business.
I would agree with point B as the AI is also part of the members of staff, even it is just a type of computer. It is just the same as a member of staff hurting another staff. I think there is no difference between a human hurting a human and an AI hurting a human. Wether accidental or deliberate, someone did get hurt in the workplace.
I would also agree with point C because the worker who got hurt might not be aware of what he/she is going or doing. It is also the worker's responsibility because he/she was the person who chose to have the job. Nobody forced them to do it. They might even told the company to add more AI to the workforce so it will save more money. It is no difference than they hurt themselves in some other way.
Overall, I would agree with point B the most and point A the least.
thoughtful_peak, you say that it is the worker's responsibility if they were hurt because they chose to have the job. Often, there are lots of things that workers don't have control over or responsibility for in their workplaces. What responsibilities do you think employers have to keep their employees safe?
Well I think that employers have a legal and moral duty to protect their employees from any hazards or risks that may arise in the workplace. They should provide a safe and healthy work environment, adequate training and supervision, appropriate personal protective equipment, and effective policies and procedures to prevent accidents and injuries. Employers can also consult with their employees and involve them in decision-making processes that affect their safety and well-being. By doing so, employers can foster a culture of trust, respect, and cooperation among their workers, and improve their productivity and performance.
Thank you
Hello Ros,
Understanding human psychology reveals a tendency to place blame on others rather than admit one's own faults, a common pattern observed in many people. This behavior often involves blaming external factors such as technology or companies rather than engaging in introspection. The challenge is that we continue to use technology, and sometimes abuse it, while pointing the finger elsewhere rather than focusing on personal advancement. However, it is important to recognize that employers and companies have a significant responsibility to their employees and users to ensure a safe and sustainable workplace. A company's success depends on the well-being of its employees, so they must feel safe in their work environment. For companies like Google and Tesla, employers play a key role in prioritizing employee safety through measures such as ergonomic workstations, safety drills and comprehensive training. Tesla, for example, ensures state-of-the-art personal protective equipment. As seen at companies like Johnson & Johnson, health and wellness programs help improve the overall well-being of employees. Employers must emphasize emergency preparedness, compliance with regulations and open lines of communication. Effective workload management and prevention of workplace harassment are key aspects of this responsibility. Companies like Microsoft actively promote diversity and inclusion, demonstrating a commitment to a positive work environment.
I only agree with opinion A. We can use AI, it just depends what we use it for. Some dangerous jobs shouldn't allow AI to do it. In this situation, someone gets hurt because of AI, which means that AI shouldn't be used for that specific task. Then at the same time, it could be a safe task for AI, but it was malfunctioning, which can be blamed on the worker (option C). But, people tend to make mistakes, and we don't know if it was what the worker had done to make AI malfunction or if it was just AI itself. I agree with opinion B the least because you can't just blame it on one person. The workers there probably gave some recommendations of using AI. And we can't blame the workers who recommend it too. AI has been very helpful to us. To conclude, I feel like opinion A is the most reasonable opinion, but opinion B isn't as reasonable.
I would like to agree with comment A. Opinion A will lead to numerous cases of job displacement. For instance:
When AI takes over some tasks, it could mean that people lose their jobs, especially those who do routine or repetitive work. Personally, I know a close friend who lost her job due to AI having the ability to work numerous hours. Sometimes I feel the product (fame, money, etc.) from hiring better people becomes too mind-blaming. When AI comes to take over companies, human corporate workers starve, not those in their own businesses and industries. I mean the middle-class people, the 9–5 drivers that work tirelessly each day to make ends meet. Some of these should be taken into consideration. In corporate society, everybody wants a spot, even AI. AI can learn biases from the data it's trained on. This can lead to unfair outcomes, affecting things like hiring and promotions. humans once again. For everything, there is an advantage and a disadvantage. AI does help in the corporate field, like helping solve simple intellectual problems, making easy transactions, and even persuading investors, but on the contrary, it weakens human problem-solving skills, creating competition for spots like positions. In conclusion, Companies should be able to divide certain jobs that resonate best with humans, e.g AI should not be in charge of the emotional field because they lack those components. AI should dominate in the construction and manufacturing fields to help builders and constructors make their jobs easier.
I think I will go with A because the company Techsolves should know that if they hadn't made the robot at first this wouldn't have happened and B because the owner is also responsible for this accident because they should keep their employees safe at all times.
Sure thing! So, diving into more details on why I'm leaning towards Option A:
Product Liability:
When a company develops and introduces a technology like AI into workplaces, there's a reasonable expectation that the product is thoroughly tested for safety. If something goes wrong, especially causing harm, it points to a potential failure in their due diligence.
Ethical Responsibility:
Ethically, a company should prioritize the well-being of individuals interacting with their technology. If they're aware of potential risks or uncertainties, it's their responsibility to address these issues before deployment.
Regulatory Compliance:
Depending on the industry and region, there might be regulations in place regarding the safety standards of technologies introduced in workplaces. If the company doesn't adhere to these standards, it reflects a failure in meeting legal obligations.
Reputation Management:
Any harm caused by their technology can tarnish the reputation of the company. In today's interconnected world, news travels fast. A commitment to safety not only protects individuals but also safeguards the company's image and credibility.
Preventive Measures:
Proactive measures, such as robust testing, risk assessments, and continuous monitoring of AI systems, should be integral parts of the development process. This not only reduces the likelihood of incidents but also demonstrates a commitment to safety.
In summary, for me, it all boils down to the responsibility a company bears when introducing a potentially impactful technology like AI into workplaces. It's about ensuring the safety of the product, protecting individuals, and upholding ethical and legal standards. If a company fails in these aspects, they should take responsibility for any resulting consequences.
I believe, and I quote "The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe!" It wouldn't an incident of considerable surprise if the AI developing company sold a robot of lower quality at greater price to the company. It's the most obvious way of maximising profits - reduce production cost by depleting good's quality. Every product, before getting launched into the market is 'pilot-tested' for any errors or bugs or potential threats. Now imagine, if the error reports of the pilot-testing got leaked? The complete reputation of the company would go into the shambles. How much easier would it be to sell it without any tests?
Thus, if such an incident is to happen, I believe selfish intentions of the production company, manufacturing the robots should be held responsible.
The comment I disagree the most with is "The owner of Techsolves is responsible. They should keep all workers safe at all times." I mean seriously? The owner of Techsolves is not a bodyguard. Protecting employees at "All Times" is not something that should be expected from a human at any costs. It is well beyond his capacity. Thus, the owner of Techsolves cannot be held responsible under any circumstances for any mishap in the company.
I think it's pretty obvious that Techsolves has a duty to protect its employees from any harm. They can't just ignore the risks and expect people to work in dangerous conditions. That's not proper at all. They should always make sure that the workers have the proper equipment, training and support to do their jobs safely and efficiently. If they don't, they are not only putting their workers in danger, but also their reputation and profits. That's why I believe that Techsolves is responsible for the well-being of its workers and should never compromise on their safety.
I agree with option B,
Now there are two parties to blame in this case, they are, the company that employed the AI and the makers of the AI.
Let me start with the fault of TECHSOLVES that employed the use of The AI bots: All this is partly their fault for not researching adequately before buying of using something that would determine the whether the company progresses or retrogresses. Why would one possibly be so careless to use something you do not even know about.
It is just like saying because one is hungry, anything that is given the person should just collect and start eating without making enquiry of what it is. Mistakes are there to be made right? but then there are some mistakes that are just not worth making.
Now for the AI production company, why release something that is not well trusted and tested. The disadvantages of doing such are very high and should be spoken about.
>This can change public opinion about AI's, it would make Ai's look like they are bad, and many would not want to patronize the very helping AI's. While many enjoy using them to improve the quality of their work and gain assistance in different aspects of life.
>Let's look at the health aspect, look at the times of strike when hospitals depend on the AI's to care for patient, imagine giving a specific prescription for the patient and the robot malfunctions and gives an under or overdose. In such conditions either the patient is lost, or the condition gets worse.
You can now see why I agree with option B.
I concur with A and C that AI developers have responsibility for their work, but AI is not an alternative for people in a setting where people predominate. They also concur that employees who suffer injuries are accountable for their behaviour since they can choose how careful the worker is.
I will choose option C because many people develop the habit of misusing products. Every machine or product typically comes with a manual explaining its operation. I'm confident the creator has specified how it should be used, but we often exceed those guidelines, using the machine carelessly, which can result in accidents. I won't blame the company, as they make efforts to safeguard users of their products.
In my overall opinion, I agree with opinion A the most. Why I agree with opinion A the most is because, when a person develops something tech related, they have to make sure the programming is up to date or if it is safe to use. When a person gets hurt by something that is not fully developed, it is the programmers fault aka the company's responsibility. In this case, the company didn't run enough tests to see if the artificial intelligent robot was safe for people to be around. Meaning it was the company's responsibility since the robot malfunctioned out of the ordinary.
But the opinion I disagree with the most is opinion C. Why I disagree with the opinion is that, how would a person know when a robot is going to malfunction? How would they be responsible since they didn't know what was going to happen to them when the robot malfunctioned out of the ordinary? I mean it would be their responsibility if they got hurt by doing something stupid. But the person who got hurt was hurt by a robot. How should they know if they would get hurt just by walking by a robot? Meaning it wasn't the worker's fault, it was the robot.
Who made the AI technology is responsible for the accident if they didn't check the safety of AI before selling it.
I agree with A and B because if a robot malfunctions it is part of the coding so whoever wrote the code is responsible. The malfunction could have been written correctly but someone put a virus in the code and the code goes wrong.the company needs to look out for intruders who try to hijack the company. Also the company should be checking the codes for the robot so they don't malfunction.
hello everyone,
Artificial intelligence is a man-made invention. There are two types of people in today's society, one type is to comment on the negative side without looking at the positive side and the second type is to eliminate the negative side and highlight the positive side. It is natural that human inventions will be controlled by humans but currently it is working against humans by abusing it. Humans are responsible for this. People consider artificial intelligence as their colleagues and helpers and become dependent on them. Artificial intelligence takes away people's professions or workplaces, rather people are giving more importance to artificial intelligence than humans in those professions and completing activities with them as they think is useful. Through social media, artificial intelligence or people post objectionable comments and obscene pictures and videos on various issues. Artificial intelligence is to blame for some negative impact in the society but then there is no fault of the people behind it, this is the misconception of the people.
* This is a made up story.* In a hospital, AI could make a recipie for a medicine but the medicine actually makes the patient worse! A company is selling this AI sorce to most hospitals but they haven't tried this machine themselves. The hospital conplaines because they are selling a product which is dangerous to the patients. The company says that the master said he strictly followed instructions and the AI must contained way too much information. So who's fault is it? The master's, the company's the hospital's or the person who applied a bit too much information? I think its the person who applied too much information, because they had a massive responsibility to programme to create multiple recipies to fix medicines but i also think that its not completely his fault because making medicine include adding loads of information
Great story telling about the responsibility of AI.
If you were to go inside a car that can drive itself, this is because of the development of AI. But if it crashes, you can't blame AI. This means to me that AI doesn't need to grow since we have all the things we need of AI so far like:
Computers, I pads, Phones, all technology that involves screens. You would most likely feel safer to be in a car that person is driving, I believe that AI shouldn't develop any more and that at the end of the Topical Talk, AI should have a limit to growing, we have all the things of AI that we need. No-one should ask for more things because AI isn't needed in the world apart from the things we already have that most people think is good in my view.
I agree because... points no. A and B because the comoany which developed that Ai will be responsible because it is developed by them and they should check out and test the Ai before selling it in the market and the man who brought it should also be responsible because he should buy the Ai by testing and by making confirm that it is ready to use
For me, option A is to blame. I think that the robot malfunctioned and the worker get hurt because the company buys the products to make the robot and to make sure that all technical things are ok. So it seems that the materials weren't right and the robot wasn't programmed safely.
I agree that the company which developed the AI is the most responsible,the company should definitely ensure that the robot is free from bugs that create accidents. Proper demos should be given by the company, as to how it should be handled effectively. I do agree that AI makes our work easier, however, we should be equally careful and see that we are aware of its operation. Though this is said, I cannot agree that the worker is responsible. Given the scenario that the workers are given proper training, there is very less chance that he/she gets hurt because of non-effectiveness in handling AI. So the worker is least responsible. Infact, the company should take due ownership for the quality of the AI. The owner of Tech-solves has an equal and moral responsibility to ensure that it's workers are safe.
I think the company who develops it should be responsible because as the statement said it shouldn't be in workplaces if it is not safe. If the technology has defects in designs then it should not be used as experimental technology in a workplace setting. Proper safety measures should also be provided because if the AI lacks safety measures to prevent malfunction and harmful actions the devloper should be responsible for neglecting them. The AI developer could be held liable if the technology was inherently defective or lacked proper safety measures, and the malfunction directly caused the injury.
I believe option B is the most reasonable choice since it is the company's duty to ensure the safety of its workers. I believe that the decision to use robots was made by the company, and the workers had no say in it. Therefore, it is the company's responsibility to regularly inspect all machines to guarantee the safety of their employees. Of course, others may have varying opinions on this choice.
I personally agree to A the most and the least with B. I think A is the best option because, the company who are developing AI should know its merits and demerits. If they are developing AI they should hire professional workers. They should be aware of possible accidents that can happen. They should be responsible for everyone. In the future AI will do almost every work but, they can’t replace humans. A robot can malfunction but a man or a women can’t. It shouldn’t be in some places or fields where it’s not completely safe.
For the moment, Option C is also a good option because it’s saying that the workers are responsible for this which is a pretty good line in my opinion. I also think that the workers can avoid it and they should know which work would hurt them and which wouldn’t.
I strongly agree with A, because if a company sends a robot that can cause harm to people, and is not ready it's there responsibility to take care of the robot and make sure nothing happens to it, and most importantly to the citizens of the company! I agree with C the least because if a worker is walking past and the AI devise is hearting the person, that person should not be blamed for the damage, and the thing that the robot has done.
You could say, that the worker is responsible for it swell, because he/she could be looking were they were going and hide to call the police/company that develops AI.
If any ai has malfunctioned,we can't completely blame the ai developer or the company as there sometimes may be the fault of the users carelessness. In my view, I agree the most with option A but I also agree with the fact that we can't only blame the company as it may be because of the users carelessness.The company is the one to develop or create the ai.They should be known about their products effects.They should check if their are any bugs in the ai. We all know that to use ai the user should know the proper use of it and should be careful. If the user is careless about the use we can't put the developer to blame.So, in my opinion both the option A and C are kind of responsible
In my opinion I would like to do agree with B . The owner is responsible for workers safety at all the times. Workers are the main source of the techsolves.
Vishwa Jyoti Secondary Boarding School
I personally think that the Option A is best one far I've seen and the Option B is the least. The reason behind this is that the company is responsible to make this kind of fault in their future robotics program. If the company is making some big project like AI, Robotics, etc. they should know how to build the program safely with out malfunctioning it or developing a fault and the company or the workers should know what and how are they making this kind of big program. In simple lines, this means they should be familiar with possible accidents that can happen while building it and by the way, They should appoint very experienced workers who can confidentially make and present this kind of big projects like AI into the world. If the most of AI projects will go like this, Our world will almost conquered by the robots. I am not saying that AI is so powerful that they can control humans but it can be. Humans can potentially do everything that an AI can do.
Meanwhile, I think for option C and It would be a great option after option A. Option C is also a nice option to choose because the workers should be professional or experienced to do kind of Big program. They should know that it could go wrong or not accordingly to them and they should learn that the which field is safer and which is not. I understand that they don't know that they would hurt themselves but they should be more careful to create or work on this kind of big project.
In my opinion I agree with option A and B because the company that developed it should have been sure that the AI wouldn't have any difficulties and also I agree with B because the company should have checked before with the AI to make sure it was the right material for the work place.
I think that A and B are the best answers as if someone got hurt by something programed by me, I would strait away blame myself as I had caused it by having a malfunction in my code. It could also be B as the manager has not made sure that the workers under their care are 100% safe at all times, they should have tested it first.
Personally, I feel like the company that developed AI is responsible because before getting into the conclusion of releasing the robots into existence they should have checked for any defect and the software integrated with the AI has been bug-tested; that is, they should run maintenance on the robot and test for any malfunction in it's system and after ensuring that it's safe and will not cause hazard to the humans, it can then be released, i can confidently say that i agree with option A most and least with option B. i agreed least with option B because most workers have built a sense of trust that the robot will run efficiently and that the robots will not go rogue but now for the robot to malfunction and bridge the trust between the worker and the robot, the company should be responsible.
I can see your point that it should theoretically be the AI developers faults for not properly bug testing and checking the safety of the robots. However, it should be mentioned that smart robots can be unpredictable machinery. The company who we hypothetically work for are the ones who purchased the robots from the manufacturer, and they should be aware of the risks involved with a smart AI robot. So, although I see your point, I see more with option B. The company should have used the proper measures to keep the employee safe.
I believe that all parties are slightly responsible. I believe that the robots should have to go through testing for any and all scenarios possible to make sure an accident does not happen but I also know that you can't prevent every possible accident ever. I don't think it would be the workers fault at all because if the AI has been working just fine up until this point people let their guards down and don't expect anything to happen. I don't think anyone is at fault here and I personally believe that the best thing to do would be to implement more safety measures so nothing like that can happen in the future.
I think options (A) and (C) are correct. The responsibility lies with the company that developed the AI, as they must ensure thorough training and precautions to handle any unforeseen inputs to the AI in a safe manner, while also being fully accountable for its safety. Despite the intelligence and safety measures of AI, it remains a non-human entity, thus the occurrence of malfunctions should be anticipated, and complete dependence on it cannot be guaranteed.
Regarding option (B), while the owner is responsible for maintaining the safety of all workers at all times, individual accidents cannot solely be attributed to the owner.
I agree with options A and C.I agree with them because since they made the AI's they should be the ones taking responsibility for them.So if the AI's hurts someone then they are responsible for it and they might just need to reprogram the AI. However if the AI cannot be reprogrammed or if the person who made the AI doesn't take responsibility then i think the person who got hurt or whatever would be correct to sue or press charges.
I disagree with option C the most.I disagree because what if the worker was being careful and the AI just attacked her\him?The person who got hurt isn't responsible the person who programmed the AI is responsible.I think their not responsible because like i just stated what if the AI was programmed to do that.The person who programmed the AI is responsible because you can't get mad at the AI because it's just doing what it was programmed to do!You can get mad at the person who programmed the AI to do that because he\she made it to were the AI was programmed to do it.
I agree with option A the most. This is because, if the AI is stable to be near people if the company that made the AI didn't insure that the AI was safe before sending it out to the workplaces is horrible. On the other hand, I strongly disagree with option C. The worker couldn't have known that the AI would've attacked them if the AI randomly malfunctioned. Imagine being in GYM and you randomly got hit with a ball after minding your business. That's basically what happened here, the worker isn't in the wrong, the company that developed the AI is responsible.
in my opinion ,I agree with A and B the most A is because the company who developed AI must make sure that there is no mistakes can be done by the AI which can get someone injured so they are 100% responsible for this action. B is also very convincing because a company owner must make sure that the AI company that he is dealing with is a company which take a good care of people's lives and that they do not do any mistakes the owner of techsolves should've searched about a trusted company to prevent any risks from workers. C does not make any sense for me because the workers know that they are dealing with AI and the work that AI does is infallible so they are reassured that they are safe and they would rather the company to let them do the tasks so they be carful than letting AI do it and it can hurt them
For me, I go with the third one because now AI and technology are safe and getting safer every day, Imagine after 20 years so, I think the worker is responsible he wasn't careful at dealing with the robot, maybe he gave it a wrong order or didn't give him the enough details that the robot can do the worker's order in the best way.
Opinions 1 and 2 are not recommended for me because the owner is not responsible for every worker at the company and he is not able to look after every worker there, workers should be careful and Mentally balanced to give the best order as I side and the company is not responsible to except if the robot that she designed have an industrial error, in this case, all responsible bees on the company because they didn't make sure from the design.
I agree with option A and B but I agree least with C, I agree with A because the company didn't test the robot enough before they put it in work space but also it may be a bug and mistakes happen every now and then and I agree with B because the owner should have provided safe workspace that expect malfunctions, Am I right ?
In my opinion, option A seems the most logical. It aligns almost perfectly with a human's moral compass, and overall liability. If you produce something and market it to the public, shouldn't it be safe for the average employee who sees it every time they go to work? The option that I disagree with the most is option B. This is because Techsolves couldn't have possibly predicted that outcome if the company that programmed the AI (supposedly) said it was safe. Option C is somewhere in the middle for me. Depending on what operations the AI was performing, it would either be really easy, or really hard to get out of the machine's way. We would need more context to decide whether the employee was too close to the machinery.
I agree most with opinion B – “The owner Techsolves is responsible. They should keep all workers safe at all times.” Firstly, in this company you are working with what is considered heavy or fragile machinery, like a half to life-sized robot. There should have been the proper safety precautions to prevent someone getting hurt, like wearing the proper safety equipment, taking measures like turning the robot off, or simply keeping a safe distance. However, I do recognize this opinion has its flaws that even if the company takes all of the proper safety precautions, sometimes accidents happen and human errors are made.
What I least agree with is opinion A – “The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in the workplaces if it’s not safe!” While this is true to some extent, the AI manufacturers are not the company that are meant to regulate the safety protocols. I disagree with this opinion mostly because you can take in consideration jobs today that are very dangerous, but people are fine due to proper safety precautions.
For example, Mark the scientist works with Radium and studies the effects it has on living organisms, and what Radium is effectively used for. Mark wears layers and layers of radiation safe gloves, goggles, a FFP3 mask, a hazmat suit, and works with the material in its designated area. He even takes quick showers before and after leaving the designated area in his lab. For the next twenty years of his career, none of his colleagues or himself have contracted radiation sickness or cancer.
There a plenty of other dangerous jobs like X-ray technicians, construction workers, even a minor.
Therefore, I don’t think it would be fair to say they shouldn’t have it in the workplace just because it is allegedly unsafe. The company should have taken proper safety measures and looked more closely at their employees while dealing with such machinery.
I found all the opinions good
But I don't think they should be blamed cause they surely might have no idea about how did it malfunction.
If they knew it then it's obvious that they won't keep it in workplace. And I believe that there won't be any owner who wants to kill their workers and ruin their company's reputation. Also there won't be any worker who might be willing to die by their own crafted robots. Furthermore, also the company might not be too irresponsible for not providing a safe zone for workers during any malfunction. They might have been panic and didn't understand what to do..
What do y'all think about it??
I agree most with option B: "The owner of Techsolves is responsible. They should keep all workers safe at all times." Ensuring workplace safety is ultimately the responsibility of the company, especially when implementing advanced technologies like AI.
I agree least with option C: "The worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful. It’s no different to if they hurt themselves some other way." While personal responsibility is important, in the context of advanced technologies, the primary duty should lie with the company to provide a safe working environment.
In my opinion, I agree with point A. The reason why I agree with point A is because even though AI has done a lot of good in the world, if the company developed the AI the wrong way, AI could be dangerous and unnecessary at times. For example, say somebody programs an AI to take care of a patient at the hospital, but the company does not know that the AI is not programmed correctly, then it will either shut down or malfunction. In conclusion, if the company does not program the AI the right way, it can malfunction. That is why the company should be responsible for the damage that the AI does.
I agree with option A the most. Why "hire" an AI if bad things like this will happen? As being responsible for a person getting hurt, it is on the company that created the AI's fault. I agree with option C the least because if it was the machines fault, why blame the worker? I get if the worker did it to themselves, but saying it is no different then hurting themselves is a little far. The AI being put to work needs to know how to properly take care of tasks and not be able to hurt others if they are trustworthy enough to be put in a position to take care of work.
I strongly agree with ‘B’ because the CEO of the company who introduced the AI into the workplace should program the robots very well so they insure with 100% confidence that AI will not malfunction or cause any harm. This should be happening in lots of other workplaces that use AI because AI can always turn on us whenever so we will have to be very cautious.
I agree with A because whoever made the AI should be responsible about their creations and what they made.
In my perspective,I agree mostly with point (C).
Because it was mentioned that things would happen without a problem,until this specific worker had an accident.then,it was his problem for not being prudent,but I blame the owner for not providing durable equipment, why I state that is for the reason that the worker got hurt.
The one which I disagree with the most is point (A),since that if the company didn't supply proper workplaces, that's because the first workplaces were fulfilling and problem used to happen,so i blame the worker for not being cautious enough.
Thank you.
I totally agree with option A. The companies that developed the AI should be held responsible for the accident, as producers they have to make sure that the Artificial intelligence machines are properly coded to avoid accidents and misconduct. The developers of AI should be accountable and take responsibility for the machines because of case of liquidation.
I don't agree with option C because those who are injured are going through a lot of pains at that point of time , so putting the blame on them will add more pains to the already existing injury. When they hurt themselves they should be given care and not blames.
THANKS.
Hello everyone, AI is artificial intelligence made by humans. It always works under the command of man. It cannot do anything outside of man's command. Various risky tasks are carried out by AI. The role of AI or artificial intelligence is important in all the tasks that can be fatal to people. Therefore, it must be careful in its creation and use. If it is not created and used properly, there can be great danger. Artificial intelligence or AI has a very nimble hand that plays a role in making many small parts of modern machinery. Now this artificial intelligence is being further improved. Currently AI can participate in various international tasks like reading news. So this artificial intelligence needs to be mastered in order to improve and create. thank you
I believe it's because it is the company that developed AI. I think this is because the company should have checked and made sure that they were safe. The reason why the company should be responsible is because they developed the AI. But it could be c depending on what type of job it is. But mostly it would be the company and if this ever happens you can sue the company.
I undersatnd your point of approach but try to view this one from a wider perpective. To begin with, humans play a crucial role in the development and oversight of AI systems. However, errors can occur due to limitations in human understanding, biases in data, or unforeseen ethical considerations. Companies may not be at fault if they have taken reasonable precautions in development and deployment. AI systems, especially advanced machine learning models, are inherently complex. They involve intricate algorithms and neural networks that can be challenging to fully understand. Faults may arise from the inherent complexity rather than negligence on the part of the AI company. Also, AI companies may design products with specific use cases in mind, but users may employ them in unforeseen ways. Faults may occur when AI systems encounter scenarios or data inputs that were not anticipated during the development phase.
Now don't get me wrong, i'm not saying that the humans operating the systems are to be blamed entirely for the faults the AI suffers but honestly speaking, I'm kind of on the fence on this one because the faults that the AI may suffer could be either of the two parties fault and so pushing the blame entirely to one side is quite bias in my opinion.
I think that, while the company that developed the AI holds a level of responsibility for ensuring its safety, the blame shouldn't be solely placed on them. AI development involves a complex ecosystem of stakeholders including regulators, users, and the deploying company. All parties must collaborate to ensure safety protocols are robustly implemented and continually updated to mitigate risks. Therefore, while the developing company bears some responsibility, it's crucial to examine the broader context and address systemic issues to prevent future incidents.
Thanks!!
Hi,
I think the cause of the unexpected event was the AI's manufacturers. As far as I know, programmable devices or machines only work when commanded. And any automatic or programmable software can get infected by a virus or a malware. So, I blame the manufacturers for not making it immune because anything that is for public use should be safe and resistant to any malware or external threat that could affect its normal functions.
Thank You
I agree with A because the company that programmed the robot should make sure it's safe before sending it away. Also the company should have programmed the robot while thinking about how it could hurt someone. This will stop accidents from happening in the future.
Hello,
I really disagree with that statement! C, A worker who is hurt on the job should not be blamed for their injury, and it's not the same as hurting themselves outside of work. Workplaces have a duty to provide safe and healthy environments for their employees, and if someone is injured on the job, it's often because the workplace was not safe. It's not fair to blame the worker for something that was not their fault. In addition, many workers are not able to protect themselves from injury, even if they are being careful. This is especially true in dangerous jobs like construction or mining, where workers are exposed to
Well said fiery_currency.
Blaming workers for injuries sustained on the job is not fair and does not address the root cause of workplace incidents. Employers have a responsibility to provide a safe working environment and should be held accountable for maintaining proper safety measures and training. In dangerous industries like construction or mining, workers face hazardous conditions that they often cannot control. Workers' compensation exists to support employees who are injured at work, and punishing them for being injured ignores the employer's responsibility to ensure a safe workplace. Ultimately, it is the duty of employers to prioritize the safety and well-being of their workers instead of placing blame on them for workplace injuries.
I agree least with option B because, every credible company cares about its employees and can employ the services AI to improve their working conditions and not hurt them. AI can handle the tasks that are too dangerous or difficult for humans and make the workplace safer and more efficient. If an employee gets injured, it is probably because they did not follow the rules or entered a restricted area where the AI was operating. Therefore, I think the employee is responsible for their own injury.
Hello,
Let's consider the opinion of A: "The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe!" I agree with this option because... Inadequate workplaces will eventually lead to emergencies and emergency situations and since we are talking of 20yrs later the company has no excuse because by this time technology and AI would have developed and improve and along with the infrastructure of most of the building, so some of the blame will be in the hands of the company.
Option-B: "The owner of Tech solves is responsible. They should keep all workers safe at all times."
I can't completely agree with this because... the owner is not the supervisor meaning that he isn't in charge of seeing to it that everyone is doing what he or she is meant to do, but he still has some blame on his shoulder as he is responsible in checking and approving all the AI algorithmics.
Option-C: "The worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful. It’s no different to if they hurt themselves some other way."
I am in total opposition of this as the worker was supposedly just minding his business when this accident occurred, the AI could have just suddenly attacked.
In conclusion the three parties had a role to play but I still think that the AI is responsible because as at 20yrs from now I believe AI could have developed emotions of their own causing them to behave as humans. Hence the AI would have its reason for doing what it did.
THANKYOU.
I agree with a; I believe this since if AI can harm people why are we using it.This proves that AI is a threat to humanity , as a result the company is to blame: they have developed this.A malfunction is just a case of a lack of attention.Although I think disdainfully of AI, I believe AI could be used to help those in need of support as long as it is being monitored with extreme care; our safety is vital.
I agree with opinion A. The company that made the bot has to be held responsible if anything goes wrong. Because it is violation to release and sell a malfunctioning product. I certainly know everything malfunctions, but you have to test it before releasing it because anything can go wrong anytime.
I agree with option A because the whole reason that AI exists is because the people program them to preform the tasks they do. It should also be the person who created the AI's fault because it is their job that they don't get in an accident. However, I also believe that C is partly correct, because the person who got hurt was probably in the programmed path the robot was meant to go.
I agree with opinion A. The company that made the bot has to be held responsible if anything goes wrong. Because it is violation to release and sell a malfunctioning product. I certainly know everything malfunctions, but you have to test it before releasing it because anything can go wrong anytime.
Personally I agree with the opinion 'B' the most. This is because it is down to the company to decide whether a piece of technology is safe for their workers or not. They obviously originally believed that this Artificial Intelligence was 100% safe and were then later proven wrong after its malfunction.
It isn't down to the company that made the AI and robots because they never forced anyone to use it in the workplace. Even if it was manufactured incorrectly it would only lead to a partial fault from the company that made the AI, but mostly at the fault of the company that continued to use a faulty product. So it is entirely at the fault of Technosolve and their managers who had decided to use this specific AI in their company.
However, if the worker was using the robot improperly and not in a safe manner then they also may be at a partial fault. So as long as they had training on how to use it, for the worker to later use it dangerously, then the worker may also be at fault.
In conclusion, I believe that opinion 'B' is most responsible for the malfunction and the injury. This is due to them allowing their workers to use this technology without knowing what could go wrong when using it.
I firmly support option A. If something undesirable occurs, it's only right that the AI's creator bears full responsibility. No flawed product should be released; it's plainly incorrect. Understandably, issues can arise, but extensive testing is required before its public launch. It's a fundamental duty, surely? Ensuring safety must be done before introduction!
I saw that most of the comments here align with option A and C, however I personally feel that I agree with option B because if someone is manufacturing a technology and selling it to someone else it is the duty of the consumer to make sure that it is not faulty and also just like regular equipment and machines need to be repaired and tested, even AI powered robots need to be checked upon on regular basis and if it is not done then it is not the manufacturer's fault but the fault of the operating company. Lastly we also can't blame a worker's carelessness for no-one can do much if a machine in front of you malfunctioned and you got injured it's just like a car broke traffic rules and hit you, you are not the one at fault. Hence according to my reasoning the owner of TECHSOLVES is responsible for the mishap.
I agree with A, even though it might seem like a bad choice. The company that made them should have done many many tests to prepare them to be in workspaces. I agree the least with C, i say that because how is it the workers fault if the manufacturer didn't prepare enough and try to not hurt people in the workspace.
Hello,
I personally agree with A as if they have developed unsafe AI they should then test it or not sell it at all or it is inevitable that someone is going to get hurt. Furthermore, the company making the AI should not be seeking money but instead the safety of others which makes it even more their fault. However i disagree with B as they were sold a broken product. As far as they know it is completely safe and functioning. It could have been the workers fault but we do not have enough information on the incident that can say the worker misused the equipment.
Personally I totally agree with opinion A the most. You see, we're looking for who is responsible for the situation. In my opinion being responsible means being in charge or in control of something, meaning that the company is mainly responsible because they are the ones who are organizing the creation of the AI bots. Yes it is normal for a bot to malfunction but the company is responsible for lowering the chances of of it occuring. If they're not able to do so they shouldn't be released in workplaces nor the society to avoid accidents like this from getting worse, it should be kept under more testings and be further evaluated.
I don't totally disagree with opinion B but I agree with it least. Yes the owner is part of the people who make up the company but they are mainly accountable for running the company, because in some organizations the owner isn't always around and able to see everything going on in the company at all times that is why most owners hire someone to give them a feedback on what is going on within their company. That is why I don't think it is possible all workers safe at all times but they can improve the chances of it happening by ensuring everyone strictly adheres to the safety hazards of the company.
For opinion C, I think it is partially the worker's fault because an accident took place as the worker got hurt, making the situation unexpected. I think sometimes the worker who got hurt was at fault for their misfortune. The reason why I used partially was because the worker who got hurt may or may not be responsible for the situation (at fault), because in most cases the bot may have malfunctioned because of the negligence of the safety hazards of the company.
Thank you.
From my point of view, all of them are responsible. First of all the owner of Techsolves, as a owner of a company, they should have a protocol or a plan that ensures workers safety. So, every one would be safe. Second the company that developed the AI. As a company for developing AI, they should keep in mind that there is some issues would happen and give information about how to deal with it. But think the most responsible part of them is the company developing AI. Because they must test their work and sure about its safety in then long run.
And for this i suggest formation of monitoring unit in each country that sure about safety of products of company's developing AI and be sure it would not hurt any one. Or produce a harmful effect.
If in the future someone were to get hurt in a workplace due to an AI robot, I believe that the company that developed the AI is responsible. I believe this because they are the people who created this AI and should have known what it was capable of. For example, if in today's society a company established a new machine that was used in a factory. If this machine malfunctioned and hurt a worker, you would most likely believe that the people who created it would be at fault. This is why it would be the company's fault in this scenario too, especially due to AI being quite new so they should look into all of the possibilities of what could go wrong.
I agree least with C as, in most scenarios, the workers would probably be being quite careful due to how new this particular type of AI is but sometimes being a bit weary isn't enough to protect yourself from the dangers. This also happens in jobs these days as we can't always protect ourselves from everything that may cause harm to us. As well as this, the workers would probably know the least information about the AI due to them not creating it so they may not be aware of what the AI is capable of and what risks they may face.
I strongly agree with option A, because in a company where safety is not confident people are not suppose to work there, because one day a person might get hurt which can lead to a problem. And I do not support option B, because I believe that the owner has made sure the employees feel comfortable doing thier job.
Thank you👍
personally, I think that the company who developed the AI tool is responsible as they should be completing multiple safety procedures to ensure that these events do not occur, the robot should not be working alongside humans if it is not completely safe. An alternative to this is to have a failsafe plan in place to make sure if this event was to occur we would be prepared for it and able to treat it with immediate effect.
The options I agree with most are A and B, the AI and the company that developed the software itself are responsible for the incident. The company the developed the AI is at fault because of the fact that it was capable of harming someone. I believe that AI can assist us and aid us in our conquest for knowledge of the world around us, its purpose shouldn't be to tear us down and to harm us.
In my opinion, I think that the producers of the robot are responsible as the robot should not be working alongside other humans unless it is has had multiple safety evaluations to ensure it is completely safe to work with. One alternative to this is to have a failsafe plan to ensure if an accident is to occur that we are prepared for it and able to take immediate effect.
Can you explain how a company could make a plan "failsafe"?
I strongly agree with option B and totally disagree with option C and A. The creator of techsolve should have anticipated the probability of people getting Injured and taken proactive measures to promote safety. For Instance,they should have implemented a dedicated testing room for robots to minimize the risk of harm,and conducted test using remote controls to maintain a safe distance.
This is my perspective thank you.
As part the AI revolution is the test cases scenarios that aim at testing every activity that the AI is to perform safely. These results go back to companies that develop the AI to further polish and perfect the purpose of the AI. It is the duty of the company to share the safety net of AI to the users , so they can be aware. I strongly believe that based on these modalities laid down to ensure the safety of people in and around humans. The responsibilities is more like a double edge sword. In my opinion I agree with Opinion A , the company that developed the AI is responsible, it shouldn't be in workplaces if it's not completely safe.
I strongly agree with you because companies developing AI technologies have an ethical responsibility to ensure that their products do not pose risks to users or society at large. Plus, users of AI systems, whether they are employees in a workplace or individuals interacting with AI-driven products, deserve to be aware of any potential risks associated with the technology.
I believe in point B because, any company with technological devices or any machine must be fully responsible for the safety of their workers and they must ensure that their machines do not bring any harm to anyone who may be involved or controlling the Artificial Intelligence.The company and owner are responsible for any harm, because they haven't taken the time to check if the machines are secured for the workers. Nevertheless, I think the owner should be held responsible for any consequence because they are the ones who provided them.
I agree with approachable_television. I think when a robot is made, it should be carefully tested in order to avoid problems in future, the staff must also be well trained to use the robot and even detect any problem before it arises. Secondly, A great leader will always own up to his or her mistakes, maybe of not providing enough protection of the staff within his care. I believe whenever you are in charge of any venture or program you need to remember that everything lies within your power to create a change either for good or bad and human lives must be protected at all cost.
If this opinion has been mentioned before, I hope I can bring something new to the table. I strongly believe that C is the best answer to this problem.
First and foremost, AI used in workplaces are (and will be even in a thousand years) machines. They were created to simplify a human's job through the use of a hardware's power. Although it is reasonable to believe that AI should at least meet a few regulations in the future, they are not built to hinder or hurt humans. If a robot hurts a worker, the only thing at fault here is human error. The text also states that everything had been running smoothly at Techsolves, so this is why I'm ruling out the fault of the inventor and owner. Since we do not know more details about the accident, I can only assume that the worker accidentally mismanaged the AI they were working with, even though they were trained to manage it.
Secondly, I believe that A is the theory that holds the least water. Today people work with all types of tools some more dangerous than others. If properly instructed and paid, workers should be able to manage their tasks with any tool their employer gives them. The maker should ensure that the tool can run safely, but with only one case of malfunction, it isn't enough to blame them.
Once again I would like to mention that there could be a case made for every single point, these are just my views.
Nowadays, a proper company is obligated to follow the essential healthcare and safety terms in the context of work. Consequently, it is important for rules and checks to be carried out in a regular extent in order to prevent any inevitable and unwanted accidents from happening. So, it is ovious for the aforementioned, that the owner of a company is without a doubt utterly responsible for the hurtness of the staff as he needs to create a secure and safe environment where there is no fear about worker's physical integrity. This implies that I absolutely agree with opinion B. Moreover, in ny perspective, when a company desires to market a product, it must be sure that the specific one meets the safety rules and it is suitable for people to use it. In contrast, this product, which in this case it's AL, should not be at workplaces at all if it isn't tested. So, it goes without saying that I also agree with opinion A. Nevertheless, i firmly disagree with opinion C. Workers who are victims of a robot malfunction are not responsible for being harmed thus the robots are to blame. Although robots can accomplish a plethora of tasks without having a problem as they work and act as a human brain, they are not humans. They are machines that make mistakes without being aware of their actions. So, they shouldn't take up tasks that are not aimed for them to do because they can hurt someone who is careless.
I agree with A more than the other options because the person who got hurt was not responsible at all, how were they supposed to know that the robot would hurt them if it malfunctioned? Also, the robot itself was programmed by humans, so there is much responsibility on the ones who programmed it, they should make sure it is safe for the workers to use. But also, why would the owner of Techsolves bring in robots that had the possibility of hurting one of their workers, and if the owner did know then responsibility falls on them as well for putting their workers in harm's way. I mostly agree with A, don't release a product that isn't 100% safe.
I agree with opinion A the most. Opinion A is the opinion most truthful and the one that makes more sense to me. The company should not have let AI in the workplace without being 100% sure it was safe. The company should have ran a lot of test to determine whether or not the AI was eligible to be in workplaces to ensure workers safety. I also blame the company because the company was too careless to fully wait to determine whether or not the AI was safe or not, leading to the incident. I agree with opinion C the least because the worker did not cause the malfunction, and it was not the worker's fault that the AI was not fully tested to prevent any malfunctions. People should not blame the worker as the worker was not aware of the malfunction of the AI, which means the company should have taken the blame, not the worker.
After analysing the 3 different statements, I have come to the conclusion that there isn't necessarily someone to blame. If anything, everybody had something to do with it. The company that created the robot should have made sure that it was completely safe and harmless. However, such malfunctions happen and the AI was already out of their care. The owner of Techsolves should have made sure to ensure some safety measurements, in order for people not to get hurt. I believe that he was supposed to check and see if his employees knew all the necessary safety rules, so that they could avoid accidents. Now, let's talk about the fact that the worker who got hurt could have just been careless. Maybe he wasn't paying attention and accidentally got too close to the robot. He could have been the one to cause the malfunction, by mistake. After all, it is crucial to be extra careful when working with anything. My point is that it could have been anybody's fault and people can blame each other. What I think would be the right approach on this is for everyone to assume that they were wrong somewhere. Nobody is perfect. The next step is for the owner of Techsolves to pay for any medical bills, because the accident happened at his company. Then the company that developed the AI should probably try and improve their programming of the robots skills. In the end, the one that got injured should do his best to be more careful. What I consider to be the most important thing is to not make a big deal out of it. Causing a lot of drama over something that will probably seem small in the end isn't worth it. In many cases, we waste our precious time arguing over who is supposed to take the blame. I strongly believe that everybody should accept the fact that you happen to be wrong from time to time. And there's nothing shameful about saying it out loud.
I strongly agree with opinion A, because if the AI malfunctions aren't the workers supposed to check the programming of the AI, and checking if it safe before they release it at the workplace, and it can't be the owner's fault because he hires workers to develop the AI, and if the AI malfunction it should be the worker fault, because the owner the one who hired them to work in is business. I think the worker who got hurt can't be his own fault, because if he knew he would get hurt, I think he would have tried to protect himself from any injuries.
I personally believe answers A and B to be reasonable. On one hand, I believe that when developing a certain product (wether it be AI or not) it is important to consider risks and dangers. There certainly can never be a guarantee of a 0% chance of malfunction and because of that I don´t think a product shouldn´t be put onn the market if it isn´t completely safe. It is the company´s responsibility to judge wehter the risk is to high for them. The employee can´t control what machines they have to work with, that is the company´s job. They have to decide if the AI´s benefits and efficiency are worth possible injuries and because of that they almost carry the entire responsibility for when said situation (which they were warned about) actually happens.
I disagree with option C
First of all.
Accidents are not planned,they are unforseen circumstances that cannot be avoided.
The preview states that
"Ai is used for a lots of tasks and has done it without no problem
So literally an accident occured because of a malfunctioning.
We should not forget Ai are assistant
They are robots who assist us with difficult tasks.
They give us facts,and contain a lot of information.
There could be a malfunctioning,just as humans get sick,so as ai can also get malfunctioned.
Furthermore,there are multiple reasons why they could be an accident, perhaps wrong wiring,or overload of information.etc
To conclude,
Although there are numerous reasons why accident could happen,it does not also mean that the company shouldn't be extra careful.
They should be working with equipped tools and equip their workers with the right amount of resources/materials to keep them safe .
I agree with Option 'A' the most. The AI developer is most responsible in cases of AI malfunction and harm to a worker due to several factors. They bear the responsibility for designing and developing the AI system, ensuring it is safe. If design flaws, programming errors, or inadequate testing led to the malfunction, the developer can be held liable. They are expected to adhere to safety standards and regulations, and negligence or lack of due diligence in their work can contribute to their responsibility.If they would make it perfectly, there would be no malfunctions and the worker wouldn’t get hurt.
I agree with option 'C' the least. The worker who got hurt is considered the least responsible in cases of AI malfunction and resulting in harm due to the following reasons. Firstly, the worker relies on the AI system to perform their job safely, assuming that it has been properly designed and maintained. They may not have the technical knowledge or authority to identify or rectify any underlying issues with the AI system. Secondly, if the worker follows established protocols and procedures while using the AI system, their actions can be seen as reasonable and within their scope of responsibility. Lastly, the worker's primary goal is to perform their duties and may not have direct control over the AI system's functioning or safety measures.
Fearless_mandarin, I agree with you.
The designer as the designer did not program a system to stop this from happening.
i think the answer is a because the worker doesnt know what the robot will do and they should not have to pay for its mistakes . i think the company should be the one to blame because they made it and before sending them out they should make sure every single fault is sorted out before they send them out . if we had to pay for a robots mistake not the company we would loose more money than hiring a man or woman to do the job
I agree with you as the designer should of either been more careful or have designed a system to stop this from happening.
Honestly, i am stuck between opinion B, as Techsolvers should be more careful of the workers, but at the same time, however everyday working with the robot, nothing bad happens and the company couldn't have known that, i am sure that the company tested it many times, so i do not agree with opinion A. Opinion C, i completly disagree with as the worker couldn't have known that. So i agree with opinion B
In my opinion l mostly agree with A as it would be the company's fault as this means that there are faults and problems in the code. Another reason to support this if the company did not allow the ai to come into their facility or even if they coded it is the company's fault with having an ai within their facility However I overall think that we should not have ai as these things would not happen to them. So I think that ai is a TERRIBLE idea I think that we should not have ai as they can be and are absolutely STUPID.
I disagree with C. People should know that if they make something that can control everything, and made it smarter than the human itself, you could already see that the AI will stop listening to people commands, and will take over the world. I can't believe what this world is doing to itself. I know this might sound weird but, I believe that our world will soon be taken over by robots and AI.
I agree with opinion A because an AI cannot be held responsible for any mistakes they make because they do not have a conscience so they do not know the difference between right and wrong , which is why I think that the company that developed the AI should be held responsible for any mistake that the AI makes because they have control of the AI and if the AI hasn't been properly tested, they shouldn't take the AI out in the open if there is possibility that the AI might malfunction.
I agree with you. I think Opinion A holds the company that developed the AI responsible for the malfunction and resulting injury. In this scenario, Techsolves, as the developer, bears responsibility for ensuring the safety and reliability of their AI systems. If the AI malfunctions and causes harm, it suggests a failure in the development, testing, or implementation processes. Companies deploying AI in workplaces have a duty to thoroughly assess and minimize risks associated with their technology. If the AI is not completely safe, as indicated in Opinion A, then the responsibility lies with the company to address these shortcomings before introducing the technology into workplaces. Therefore, Opinion A emphasizes the accountability of the AI developer in maintaining the safety of their creations
In my opinion I believe B is right sinces the owner should be able to keep his worker fine and safe at work the person who got hurt should have their hospital bills paid by the company
I completely agree with A. They should make sure that the robot is safe and flawless before releasing it. The tiniest flaw can make the biggest damage. They should have put together every event that could happen to hurt someone or create disaster they probably didn't think of everything that could happen in the release of the robot. It is best to stop selling the robot and fix the flaw before there are bigger issues. It is (in my opinion) not the fault of the worker the worker did not release the robot he/she was not the robot engineer that made it.
I agree with A and B because it isn't the person's fault. The AI malfunctioned. So, personally, I think that AI's shouldn't be allowed to be in that workspace until they prove that they are safe. Yes, AI is helpful, but it can't take the space of a man. Even though AI is useful, it can be harmful to humans. The company were the ones who decided to use AI, so I think they should be the ones responsible for the worker getting hurt. I disagree with C, because the worker could've been doing their work and the AI got in their way, not the worker getting in the AI's way.
i think its b because the should be responsible because they made the company
B In my opinion, in every scenario all workers in every job should be kept safe. A safe working envoirment means there is more job employees so workplace should be a safe space, with or without robots. It is compulsory, if a robot does malfunction and causes injury to a worker it is NOT the person job to keep themselves safe, I believe if a robot malfunctions the case should go to court and give the company a fine. In the future, if robots are introduced into the workplace, they need to be thourouly checked and tested before the manufacture gets to put the electronics on the market.
Yes I agree with what you have said that if AI bots are bought they should be totally tested before use. Thanks for your nice comment.
The responsibility for the development of the AI lies with the company that created it. It is crucial for companies to ensure that AI technology is safe before implementing it in workplaces. The potential risks associated with AI should be thoroughly assessed and mitigated to protect the well-being of employees and the overall work environment. By prioritizing safety, companies can avoid any potential harm or negative consequences that may arise from the use of The presence of AI in workplaces should only be permitted if it meets stringent safety standards. The company that developed the AI bears the responsibility for ensuring its safety and reliability. It is essential for organizations to conduct comprehensive testing and risk assessments to identify any potential hazards or vulnerabilities associated with the AI technology. By taking proactive measures to address safety concerns, companies can create a secure and conducive work environment that promotes the well-being and productivity of their employees. It is crucial to prioritize the safety of individuals and ensure that AI technology is thoroughly vetted before its implementation in workplaces.
THANK YOU
I went with option A since the manufacturer brought it to work even though they knew it wasn't entirely safe. They need to have conducted additional testing in their company to determine its fitness, knowing that it was necessary. Companies should be held accountable, in my opinion, if they release robots that malfunction and harm people after due investigation and trial.
Personally it is everyone's fault due the fact that one the worker knows how to control the robots therefore if he gets hurt that is his own responsibility. Second the company does have to at least pay for some of the damages due to it happening in their building with their creation. Third both sides are correct and knowing that both the worker and the company got them selves into this mess it has to be handle accordingly. Now to answer the question I agree with both opinions.
The opinion I agree with the most is option A and the one I agree the least with is option C. This is because it was the AI at fault if it has not probably not been tested if it hurt someone and that is very negative for humans, also for the company so it should be tested more in case of the situations. I agree least with C because the robot malfunctioned and hurt the human and the company should be on pause so that we can be safe in the future.
In my opinion, I agree with A and B because if the company developed the AI to help it should also make sure that the employees are safe. The owner is also responsible since they are the ones who allowed the robots to be in the office. If the company is going to allow AI in the office, it should be developed so that the robot will not cause harm.
I least agree with option C, It's not appropriate to blame the employee or workers for getting injured, as it is the worker's responsibility to ensure that the workplace is safe and free from risks. In fact, blaming the worker for getting hurt can create a culture of fear and discourage workers from complaining injuries or danger in the upcoming time.
The option that I agree most is option A that says "The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe!" Yes it should not be in the workplace if it is not completely safe to be used in a workplace. While the one I agree least is option C that says "The worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful. It’s no different to if they hurt themselves some other way." Yes why I say so is because it is not the workers faults but the manufacturer of the AI bot.
So in conclusion, what I am trying to say is that whatsoever that happens in a workplace due to the fault of an AI is completely the fault of the company that actually produce it. So with my few points I have said, I hope I have been able to convince you that any AI accident been caused is due to the responsibility of the company that manufactures the AI.Thanks .
I agree with option no A the most because I think the primary responsibility lies with the company that developed the AI. Ensuring the safety of AI in workplaces is crucial, and developers should thoroughly test and implement safeguards to prevent malfunctions. While the owner of Techsolves also bears some responsibility, the company that created the AI holds a central role in ensuring its safety. I would be less inclined to agree with the option no C because the opinion that the worker who got hurt is solely responsible, as the emphasis should be on providing a safe working environment through advanced technology and thorough testing.
Hello.
I strongly believe in A because the company that developed AI is responsible because after producing the machine It should be practically checked before distributing it to consumers. But if it is not checked properly it can malfunction and gives a serious injury to the consumer. AI can never replace man in this life till infinity. I also agree with C because why should individuals engage in the production of AI when the know that some times AI are dangerous. In Conclusion the most option is A and least option is C.
Thanks!
Actually, I believe and also stand on what you have said brilliant_plantain that yes option A is the most important while the least is option C thanks for this comment but I have a question for you which is why did you not choose option B and please explain more about it so as I can understand. Thanks for your comment.
In my opinion I say A and C. I believe that it is A because If the AI were to be under the property of the company they would be responsible for any damages that they cause. On the other hand if the person who was with the AI was doing something to the robot or AI, like, for example if they were to be fixing the AI without knowledge of how to do so, they would be responsible, so that's why also it could be C.
I agree with the three options.
Firstly, the company is responsible for keeping the harmful AI equipment in the workplace when they know quiet well that they are not safe enough to be kept with humans.
Secondly, option B is also important because anywhere you are working as a worker, your employer should be responsible for your safety in his or her company and so are not supposed to keep harmful AI equipment around the company that will hurt you as the employee.
Thirdly, the option C also advises the employees in the workplace to be careful when handling any AI equipment in order to keep himself or herself save from accident in the workplace because if you are hurt, it is their own detriment and therefore will be responsible for their injury.
I agree that all three of these choices may be at fault in an accident, but why all three of them? Because these possibilities require human capability, which can occasionally be caused by carelessness, negligence, exhaustion, and other factors. Humans are prone to making mistakes that pose a major harm to them. By working together, the owner, the worker, and the firm can prevent accidents like this one by educating everyone about safety precautions.
Personally, I lean towards option B. The responsibility for ensuring a safe working environment ultimately lies with the company, in this case, Techsolves. The owner is accountable for the well-being of their employees and should implement thorough safety measures to prevent such incidents.
On the flip side, option C seems less convincing to me. While personal responsibility is important, the worker might not have had complete control over the malfunctioning robot. Placing the blame solely on the individual might overlook systemic issues that need addressing.
What about you? Which option resonates with you, and why? And which one do you find less convincing in this scenario?
I personally agree with both A and, though I think that opinion A is half true. Opinion A, says that the owner of the AI is responsible and I agree with this because as the owner of the AI, it's supposed to be as safe and as effective as it can be, but in the scenario, it says that this is the future, technology most likely is highly used, advanced, and needed so the argument that it shouldn't be in workplaces is invalid. Although opinion A is half true, I think opinion C is completely true. Opinion C says that the worker is responsible for not being careful and I agree with that because, with technology and AI, nothing is 100% safe. For example, a millwright works both indoors and outdoors and wears protective clothing and gear, such as hard hats, gloves, and work boots, on a daily basis while working. Even while working with machines that are big and stable they still have protective gear. This should be no different for workers who work with AI machines. In conclusion both opinion C and opinion A are reasonable.
In my opinion I agree most with opinion A, one way or the other someone did not fulfil the right duties in creating the AI because if the right boxes were checked there won't have been a malfunction in the AI and if they knew it wasn't fully safe, they shouldn't have thrown it out to the market, they should have double checked their robot, putting it on multiple trials before letting out to the market .
in my perspective I agree less with opinion C, it says the worker is at fault and if there was a malfunction in the AI it won't totally be the workers fault because the worker has nothing to do with the programming of the AI
I feel that A and C are the ones that should be responsible because if you're the company that developed the AI then that is your responsibility and if something goes wrong that is your fault. Also the worker who got hurt is responsible as well because they know the ways to getting hurt and why they got hurt.
What do you do if a machine is bad?
Firstly, I once read a quote that emphasized that "the computer isn't stupid; it will do exactly what you tell it to" suggesting a direct link between human input and AI behavior. The imperfections in human communication or oversight can manifest in the AI's performance.
Secondly, the common practice of referring to AI systems as distinct entities, like labeling YouTube recommendations as 'the algorithm,' creates a divide between developers and their creations. This division erases the human element behind the technology, potentially leading to oversights and mistakes. The case of Robert Julian Borchak Williams, wrongfully arrested by the Detroit Police Department due to facial recognition bias, serves as a poignant example of the consequences when this distinction is overlooked. Nothing is perfect.
In assigning blame, option C seems less plausible, as workers may not have intentionally caused the malfunction. They might have unintentionally deviated from standard procedures or lacked awareness of the consequences, making them the real victims.
Option A, placing responsibility on the company that created the AI, aligns with the idea of holding developers accountable. While acknowledging human imperfections, there's a call for a developer's mindset that embraces responsibility. The company that developed the AI ought to have comprehensively trained its employees on the machine's advantages, drawbacks, proper usage, potential hazards, and accident protocols. This proactive measure demonstrates the company's responsibility and accountability. This is why I partially support option B; Techsolves' owner should bear responsibility for creating a conducive working environment and ensuring the availability of educational training provisions.
Disagreeing respectfully, I see the point that the computer acts based on human input and that human errors can affect AI performance. However, attributing responsibility solely to the company that created the AI might oversimplify the situation. While the company should provide comprehensive training, it's essential to acknowledge that unintentional deviations or lack of awareness by workers could contribute to malfunctions. It's a complex interplay, and a holistic approach considering both company responsibility and worker awareness is crucial for addressing AI-related issues. While acknowledging the connection between human input and AI behavior, it's important to recognize the multifaceted nature of responsibility. Placing sole blame on the company creating the AI may oversimplify the dynamics involved. Yes, comprehensive training is crucial, but we shouldn't overlook the intricate interplay between workers' actions and AI performance.
Consider this: workers, albeit unintentionally, might deviate from standard procedures or lack awareness of consequences. This human element, when combined with the complexity of AI systems, contributes to potential malfunctions. Therefore, responsibility can't be exclusively shouldered by the company; it should be a shared commitment involving both comprehensive training by the company and conscientious actions by the individuals operating the AI. Moreover, the scenario involving Tech Solve's owner demands a nuanced perspective. Holding the owner responsible is reasonable, but it should be part of a broader strategy. Creating a conducive working environment and providing educational training are crucial, but they also require ongoing efforts to adapt to evolving technology and anticipate potential pitfalls.
Well done for replying to another comment.
I agree with option C. The worker who got hurt is liable for not being careful.
For example, if someone has a knife and accidentally cuts himself, is it the company's fault for making a knife that can cut people, or is it the customer's fault for misusing it?
It's the same thing with AI. Techsolves made a product that is useful but can be dangerous when misused.
Some may argue that the customer didn't purposely use the AI for bad intentions, and the robot malfunctioned.
However, even if the person had good intentions, it's still their fault. The story says that most of the time, the AI works. Is it the company's fault that it made a product that made one mistake after all the positive impacts it made? Humans make mistakes, too. Most of the time, humans make mistakes that occur more often and are more harmful than the errors computers make. Would you rather get one question wrong on a test, or miss a lot of questions? Computers may make one mistake per test, but humans will most likely miss multiple questions. So AI should still be used instead of being replaced by humans because they still have a smaller margin of error.
I agree with A. As we know, AI isnt perfect entirely and sometimes has malfunctions, just like us humans. But, the manufacturer should be placed at fault since they did create the machine. Safety should always be first, so tests and checks are crucial. I dont agree with B and C. The owner of techsolves wouldnt be able to predict if a bot malfunctions, they just have happened to bought the bot. again with C, the workers wouldnt be able to predict if the bot malfunctions. i could understand if the worker didnt operate the machines, but If that was the case the company would be at fault.
I disagree. Although you have reasonable points, you are forgetting that holding companies liable would most likely cause humans to take over the jobs AI once held. While this could create new jobs and improve the economy, humans would be even more likely to make mistakes, resulting in more harm. The prompt states, "AI is used for a lot of tasks and most of the time, things happen without a problem." Humans, however, make many more mistakes than robots. Therefore, is it really the company's fault that they made a robot that makes one mistake out of all the positive impacts it has made?
Hi! ive never seen it in this perspective before. Your comment is valid! But, As the company is the one that bought the bots, Wouldnt they prioritize safety for their workers? An occansional checkup would make a significant impact.
Ithink opinions about responsibility in this situation may vary, but it's crucial to consider a comprehensive perspective. Firstly, Techsolves, as the developer and provider of the AI, bears responsibility for ensuring the technology's safety in workplaces. This includes rigorous testing, ongoing monitoring, and continuous improvements to prevent malfunctions. Secondly, the company's owner holds a degree of responsibility for maintaining a safe working environment, implementing proper training, and regularly assessing the functionality of AI systems. Lastly, while workers should exercise caution, placing sole blame on the injured individual may oversimplify the issue. A thorough investigation is necessary to determine if adequate safety measures were in place and if the AI malfunction was due to unforeseen circumstances. Collaborative efforts among the company, its owner, and the worker can contribute to preventing future incidents and fostering a safer workplace. But i would like to agree with A and C.
The worker who got hurt is responsible for not been careful enough, its no difference to if they hurt themselves some other way, the workers are responsible to check how many hours the robot supposed to work, generally when a machine or a robot is stretch beyond its capacity of function can make it to malfunction and get someone hurt. because for every machine that is been produce they are manual attached to it to help the buyer to know how to operate it and not to over work it for example some time ago I overheard some tricycle riders complaint that the machine imported to the country don’t last long they Easily get spoilt and hurt people and I thought it was true so one day I boarded a tricycle, so the tricycle pick three more persons making us four, after a while the tricycle went over a bump and a piece of paper fell onto my feet I pick it up and it was the tricycle manual! I just found myself going through the manual and found that the machine was built with the capacity to carry only three people! then I turn to count and saw we are five including the driver! Then I understood the compliant of why the tricycle do breakdown easily. So, it is with a robot
I think a. I think a because people should not develop AI where they are not safe because both the robot and humans may be hurt. And like some science sci-fi movies the robots begin to riot because they were not well cared for in their companies. So if people make AI where they are not safe they shouldn't even make it at all
I chose C least because the worker who got hurt didn't know that the robot wasn't completely safe. Getting hurt in the company while performing a task in the same company is quite different from getting hurt elsewhere and outside the work hours of the company. Getting hurt while following the process and procedure of the company is not the worker's fault, it is the company's fault. In my opinion, companies have to look out for their staff and take responsibility.
I choose "A" because the Company should be responsible because they are yet to produce good robots that can put a stop to harming humans or injuring them. Companies are supposed to have developed Artificial Intelligence in order to make the Company Safe. If companies rely too much on Al prediction for when maintenance will be done without other checks, it could lead to machinery crash that Injures the worker. Models used in healthcare could cause misdiagnosis and these are further, non-physical ways Al can harm humans if not carefully regulated.
I agree with opinion A because the person who developed the AI didn’t do an amazing job on working on the AI. The AI machine doesn’t think on its own so that is why the person who developed it in this case the company had the wrong software.
The opinion that I least agree with is C because the human who got hurt didn’t deserve it. Yes they should have been careful but it’s not their fault that the AI was designed very poorly by the company.
I disagree because... It may not be appropriate to totally assume whose fault it may be ; But one thing I am sure of is that we are both not certain of whether it was a bug on the computers side , or carelessness on the humans side . With due respect , I feel we should learn to focus more on how to solve the problem than assuming whose fault it may be . With issues like this , we are given opportunities to check out our fault in developing AI's as humans and look for respective solutions to them to gain better results .
THANK YOU .
There is no straightforward answer for determining who is responsible for AI accidents because it entails a complicated interplay of different factors. An important factor in the functioning of AI systems is the people who create, develop, and train them. Developers and engineers might be held accountable if a system defect results from insufficient testing, biased training data, or faulty algorithms. The companies using AI systems may be held accountable, particularly if they disregard safety protocols, lack sufficient oversight, or put profit ahead of people's well-being. Since the company has developed AI, it is undoubtedly skilled at protecting and managing it. I believe it should be the responsibility of the organization to train the employees involved in it to at least control it so they can safeguard themselves against the risks. However, the firm bears the responsibility for this as they disregard the risk to its employees. To avoid injuries, I believe there should be specific guidelines that employees must abide by. Employees must, for instance, be completely informed about artificial intelligence and know how to safeguard themselves against any malfunctions, emergency procedures, or arrangements. Priority should be given to ensuring the workers' safety. We must always be ready for the possibility of accidents, as they can occur at any time.
I agree with the statement "The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe!" Why should you even go out of your way to develop something that you have not possibly trained or even tested yet. Things like this need time and careful work. People should not just be putting stuff in the field because they feel it’s ready.They need to KNOW it’s ready.This is why I feel future generations should not try to advance technology to early but they just need to test and evaluate it then evolve it when it is ready.
In my opinion I choose A because the company who developed this ai is responsible. Since they let it get out of the company without checking if it is suitable to get out of the company.and they are responsible for everything. This ai was never ready to get out of the factory that developed it.
I agree with both A and C because if the AI isn't safe to work with , why is it in a working environment and for c if the worker isn't careful in what they are doing the can get hurt
I think there are two answers to this question, option A and C. If something has not been properly scrutinized, it shouldn't be released into the public. Even if AI will develop some bugs after some time, at least it should be reduced to the minimum. Nevertheless, i don't think the company that developed the AI is completely at fault. It all depends on the angle you view it from. If the accident was as a result of the AI's programming then it is the company's fault but if the AI was mishandled, it will be the workers fault. As we all know, a machine will give the result of any data put into it. Simply, garbage in, garbage out. Sometimes machines don't even have issues. The workers are just novice. But safety at the workplace is important so the employers should at least train the workers well enough to be able to handle the AI with skill and not mediocracy.
In my opinion I agree with A and C as when you design anything first test you should do is to test the safety of the product to make sure that this product is safe or not , and you should try it more than one time before sale. So the company is the first one who is responsible and also the worker made a mistake as he should deal with The robot in a good way and to know how he should use it safely.
To conclude We cannot blame the company for all the fault, the worker also has a mistake
In my opinion the option i will go for is option c-"The worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful. It’s no different to if they hurt themselves some other way." because when AI's are created they undergo serious testing by the company which develops them which makes it almost 90% free of glitches therefore it means that workers who got injured by AI's are as a result of not being careful or by misusing the AI. Do not get me wrong because it is also true that after testing the AI so many times, it may still end up malfunctioning.
Option B rightly emphasizes the principle of employer responsibility for the safety of workers. Employers, as owners of the company, are obligated to create and maintain a safe working environment. This includes implementing proper safety protocols, providing necessary training, and ensuring that technologies, such as AI, are integrated safely into the workplace. The duty extends beyond individual actions and underscores the broader commitment to safeguarding employees' well-being.
On the other hand, option C places a disproportionate burden on the individual worker for their own safety. While personal responsibility is important, it should not overshadow the employer's duty to establish and enforce safety standards. Blaming the worker without considering potential flaws in safety measures or inadequate training might result in an incomplete assessment of the situation.
In my opinion, the option termed "A" which says, "The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe!" should be of more importance and be reasonable because the company that manufactured the product should've been mindful of the product and made sure that it is okay for use in other factories because the product must always be suitable for use to ensure the safety of workers.
Secondly, option B which says, ""The owner of Techsolves is responsible. They should keep all workers safe at all times." should also be of relative importance when considering the fault because the company which the worker serves in, should always ensure the safety of its workers by providing safe apparatus and equipment for production.
Lastly option C which states that, "The worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful. It’s no different to if they hurt themselves some other way" is least reasonable because, it isn't the worker's duty to ensure that the equipment is safe, but it is his obligation to operate it properly.
Thank you!!!
Hiii, Hello, Namesthe and Vanakkam to everyone.......
First of all I will explain what I understood in that scenario and then I will decide the good option and the least good option.
In the above given scenario, opinions about who is responsible for the incident can vary, and it's likely that people might hold different perspectives. Here's an overview of the three opinions:
A. "The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe!"
This perspective places the responsibility on the company that developed the AI, emphasizing the importance of ensuring the safety of AI systems before deploying them in workplaces. It implies that the company should be accountable for any malfunctions that lead to harm.
B. "The owner of Techsolves is responsible. They should keep all workers safe at all times."
This viewpoint holds the owner of Techsolves accountable for the safety of their workers. It emphasizes the responsibility of the company's leadership to create a safe working environment and ensure that adequate measures are in place to prevent accidents.
C. "The worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful. It’s no different from if they hurt themselves some other way."
This perspective shifts the responsibility onto the worker, suggesting that individuals should take precautions and be responsible for their own safety. It compares the incident to situations where individuals might harm themselves in other ways.
In real-world scenarios, discussions around responsibility often involve a combination of these perspectives, and legal and ethical considerations play a significant role in determining accountability. Regulations and guidelines for AI deployment and workplace safety would also influence the resolution of such incidents.
So according to me I think that option A is the one I agree the most because the company who created the AI should come and check atleast 6 months once or 1 year once.
And I think that option C is the one I agree the least because they shouldn't complain the workers to be careful instead of making repair of the AI.
Thank you.
I agree with options A and B. I think the company that developed AI is responsible for this because had they been careful and checked all the parts thoroughly they could have somehow prevented this. Also, they could have made the robot in a way that if there is any error, the robot stops working instead of hurting someone. The company should have carefully thought about all the potential threats but they didn't so now that there’s a problem they should take responsibility.
Also, I agree with option B because the owner of the company should have conducted all the tests and taken all the preventive measures in case something like this happens in the future. The owner is responsible for introducing the technology in their company so they should also be responsible for any mishappening. Hence, I agree with options A and B.
I greatly believe that A is the best opinion.These AI's don't have a mind so if anyone was hurt by the AI it would have no reaction at all unlike us,humans.In conclusion, the company would have take all the blame.
I agree with opinion C because All machines that exist has its pros and cons. The Robot was created for a specific task and in order to be able to perform its task it would have a disadvantage. So, when using a machine especially that can be harmful, you need to be extra cautious. It's not the owner's fault for trying to make their work more efficient and faster. For instance, if a driver is involved in an accident and gets hurt, we are not going to blame the person who produced the car because in order to be safe when driving you need to wear the seatbelt and go according to the traffic light. The same applies to the robot. You need to use it wisely knowing that anything could go wrong.
The reason I chose option A is that the company responsible for developing the robot did not fully test and ensure that the AI prototype was fully functional. If the robot is not fully tested and operated well it will cause damage and destruction to workplaces and also let it known the person who got injured is not always at fault.
In my opinion , I think the option A and B is correct. The company making the AI should not compromise safety so that they can make it work in a company. They should ensure the safety of the workers working their and how their AI should not cause harm to anyone. The option B is also correct as the company owner should not use an AI which can be responsible for someone's injury.
I disagree with the option C as the company which developed the AI should be responsible that the AI does not cause any harm to any employe and the owner of Techsolves should not be using any AI in their company which can harm their employes.
My perspective aligns most closely with Opinion A. The responsibility primarily lies with the company that developed the AI. It is crucial for AI to undergo rigorous testing and meet stringent safety standards before integration into workplaces. If the AI is not entirely safe, it should not be deployed, ensuring that potential risks are minimized from the outset.
On the other hand, I find Opinion C less agreeable. While workers should exercise caution, placing sole responsibility on the injured individual may oversimplify the complex dynamics of AI safety in the workplace. Workers may not have full knowledge of the intricacies of AI functioning, and absolute reliance on their vigilance might not be a comprehensive approach to ensuring workplace safety.
I would go with (A). I say this because even if the AI seemed safe they still needed to do as many tests as they could to ensure that no one gets hurt in the process of the AI doing its job.
Hi there!
From my perspective, the most reasonable point would likely be (B) – "The owner of Tech solves is responsible. They should keep all workers safe at all times." This perspective emphasizes the duty of the company or Organisation implementing the AI system to ensure a safe working environment. The responsibility lies with the owner or leadership of Tech Solves to prioritize the well-being of their employees. They are accountable for implementing thorough safety measures, providing proper training, and maintaining a work environment where AI technologies can be utilized without jeopardising the safety of the workers. While individual responsibility (C) is crucial, the primary onus is on the company to guarantee the deployment of AI in a manner that doesn't compromise the well-being of its employees.
In my opinion, I agree the option A and C most because firstly the company that developed has most of responsibility in his/her hand for developing the AI robot. They create all the parts of the AI so, they should be responsible. They should properly check, if there any faults on the AI and then only sell it. Secondly the person who got hurt is also responsible because he/she should know that they should carefully work with AI. I agree option B the least because the company has no any faults in this matter because they buy those AI robot in huge quantity So, they can, t carefully check every AI robot properly.
I agree with option A the most reason being there are principles of how anything works, in anything that should be done. Before a robot is released to the public for use of any sort , it should be properly tested and made sure that every thing is working perfectly and efficiently by removing any sort of bugs and errors.
I agree with option C the least why because it is not right for the company to put blames on who ever the user may be it is very wrong and unacceptable, if anything the user in any case they find themselves should sue the company for what it's woth.
i solidly agree with option A because should have precautions or assurance that that their product last to an extent and also, since is case of malfunctioning, we don't have to blame anybody for that and i think what the company us supposed to do is to find out how and where the AI machine had fault and find a way a to upgrade their product and also make it better for people to use. I will also say that it is also a way to correct the company's mistakes.
Thank you.
i solidly agree with option A because should have precautions or assurance that that their product last to an extent and also, since is case of malfunctioning, we don't have to blame anybody for that and i think what the company us supposed to do is to find out how and where the AI machine had fault and find a way a to upgrade their product and also make it better for people to use. I will also say that it is also a way to correct the company's mistakes.
Thank you.
I agree with A the most because, if a company is about to release a new technological device, it should check for bugs, test it, and check for malfunctions. A responsible company should conduct exhaustive simulations and real-world tests to ensure that the AI system operates safely under diverse conditons. Companies have a duty of care towards users and workers who interact with their technologies. This duty extends to creating systems that are not only effective but also safe for use.
I do not agree with option C because it assumes that workers are infallible and should be solely responsible for their safety. However, human errors are inherent in any work environment, and it is unrealistic to expect workers to anticipate and prevent every potential issue, especially when interacting with complex technologies like AI. Also, we all make mistakes. Plus, if a worker is not adequately trained or provided with clear guidelines on how to interact with AI systems, blaming the worker for being careless is unjust. Workplace safety is a shared responsibility that involves employers, employees, and the technologies used in the workplace. Placing the blame solely on the worker disregards the importance of fostering a safety culture within the organization, including the responsible deployment of technology.
Point A states, "The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe!". I AGREE with point A because the company should have ran many tests on the AI before exposing the workers to it. The company is at fault for not making sure that the AI is 100% safe, and making sure it has a low chance of malfunctioning. I DISAGREE with point C the most because the worker was not aware of the danger the AI has due to uninsured safety and the lack of fully testing. In addition, point C is basically blaming someone for something they are not in control of, meanwhile point A is blaming the incident on people who do have control of the AI. The company is the developer of the AI, meaning they could've ran tests on it to ensure 100% safety, showing they had control.
I agree with point A and C because they have developed technology and so , they should be responsible for its causes . Besides , they should have secured the place completely , or else , it should not be a workplace as mentioned in point A . And if they have developed technology for their use, they should be careful about its uses. So , I do agree with point C as well . Thank you !
I completely agree with point A that" The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe!" because if the robot does not work properly it can further cause problems not only for 1 robot but multiple robots so, we should focus more on how to use manpower instead of AI like the movie Terminator
The point I agree the least is B because it is the fault of the manufacturer who made a mistake while making the robot even if it is made by another set of machines and it is not the fault of the owner because he/she can also not predict how the machines would be malfunctioned while buying them for manufacturing.
Good day to all!
I agree with opinion A and B the most and C the least.
Opinion A because I completely agree that if a robot has malfunctioned, then it is the company’s fault because ultimately, it is that particular company which has developed the robot and a fault at their end resulted in the robot’s malfunctioning. I agree with option B as well because the owner of Techsolves should be cautious about their employees and workers welfare. They should thoroughly have all the robots checked which would help them detect any malfunctions or problems with the robot. It is important to understand that a robot is simply man’s creation, it does not have a mind of its own and its functioning completely depends on how it has been programmed.
I agree with opinion C the least because the person could not have predicted about the robots malfunctioning. Yes, I do agree that they could have been careful but ultimately, it’s not much of their fault. The robots programming had faults, that’s why it malfunctioned. In today’s changing world, our dependency on technology has increased rapidly and our ability to detect their flaws has reduced because of our blind faith on them. Keeping this thought in mind, we should program robots and other AI tools with a cautious and not with a lackadaisical approach. Taking a future perspective as well, we will have to be more and more watchful on the kind of technology we are inventing to prevent malfunctions like these.
Thank you
I agree with A and C because the company that evolved and developed the AI or robot would need to fetch her robot for example by weekly updates so the robot can work accurately and without mistakes and also it's the worker's problem that he can be making something wrong in the device so the robot go an error
In my view i agree with option A and .Option A says "The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe!"yes i am complety agree with this if a company have develop an Ai and there are employ to manage Ai than the company is responsible because if you are hireing the employ than its yours responsibility to make sure they are safe and in case of malfunction noone can say whoose fault is it but if company is creating the product the have high risk of hurting someone then company have to get the permission of government . I am least agree with option because why should the company owner be responsible because it is not his or her fault that the person is careless .
In fact, I agree with opinion C because simply put, the company that produced the robot is not responsible because it manufactured it and sold it, and that abdicated its responsibility. Likewise, the owner of the company is not responsible for what happened because he does not work among the workers. He only works as a supervisor or someone else, but the truth is that I see that the responsibility is somewhat on the worker because he did not He should be careful, because he relied on the robot to perform many tasks. It is a machine that works with artificial intelligence, meaning it only has some commands to carry out. Otherwise, no, so he should have been careful in dealing with it and working with it.
On the other hand, I see that we all make mistakes while working. It is possible for a worker to injure himself while working.
In this case, I agree with opinions A. The option I disagree with the most is opinion C.
Firstly, I agree with opinion A because, why is the company using Ai without knowing it's completely safe. I understand that most of the time things go pretty well so you wouldn't expect anything to go wrong, but what did the developer do wrong that made the AI do what it did? There had to be a cause for the person getting hurt and the developer was probably the problem in this case.
Secondly, I agree with opinion C the least because how would the worker know to be careful if normally everything goes smoothly? I understand that it's important to be careful at all times but but if the robot malfunction on it OWN with no warning then how is it anyone's fault but the AI and the developer for whatever they did wrong.
I most agree with A or C.I agree with A because if the AI hurt somebody the company that made it is responsible because for the robot to mainfuction the robot needs to be open so the company must have made an accident in his system so it made it malfunctioned. But on the other side for the C the worker maybe opened the robot when it wasn't ready and safe and the robot malfunctioned and hurt the worker.If the worker made it malfunction because they opened it while it wasn't done its his fault for hurting himself even if he didn't knew he wasn't ready its also his fault because you shouldn't open something if you don't know is its ready.But I disagree with B cause the owner of the company wasn't the one that made the robot and it doesn't know if the robot is built wrong.
That's what I thing about the AI accident.
Increasing of ai accident is happening now a days the responsible one for those accident is the company and the worker . Yes I do agree with A and C because since the company did not have good management and the worker did not handled it in proper way so accident happened.
I would agree with both C and A. If and android malfunctions due to an error cause by some sought of mishap in the coding,it could be blamed on the company responsibility, since they were the ones who made it and should of tested it first if not fit to be in the industry workplace yet. But if the owners of the android accidently did something to it to cause to malfunction, such as spilling some drink on its wires.
In my opinion, I would go with option C. The technology used for anything is usually tested multiple times to get the safest and the best out of it. Man created the internet and some individuals began to use it for the wrong reasons, so I feel it was the actions done by this bystander that might have caused this to happen.
I feel like it might be A because the company who made AI should have been more careful on how they are making it as something might have gone wrong or they might have forgot to do some finishing touches, and actually if something small is not finished then something big can occur and cause damage or harm to anything or anyone.
Also, the company which made AI could have done something as a mistake or someone might have and just did not want to get in trouble for making that mistake and they might have wanted to fix that but it was taken out to the other work company so it was too late.
It honestly depends. Was it a software bug in the AI, or was it the worker's own incompetence.
If it's the latter, then I choose C.
If it was due to a bug in the AI, then I choose A.
B is simply way too protective and childish. A grown adult can carry themselves, let alone a worker in a tech company.
Hi everyone!
I agree with opinion A because opinion A says that the company that developed the AI is responsible. The AI should be tested before being brought out to the public and being sold if there was a problem or a bug was noticed the company should have informed buyers of the technology about the fault before purchase so that if the company (in this case "Techsolves") buys the product it is not the fault of the company.
Sometimes bugs are found in programs after the device or piece of technology has been sold, meaning that it could not be entirely the fault of the people in the company.
I agree with opinion B the least because, I feel like the owner of" Techsolves" would have not known that the robot will malfunction meaning that they could not be blamed for any problems with the technology they bought.
Hi reliable lobster,
I very much agree with your opinion. I think it is very important that creators make sure it is safe first. If it was in any other branch, like textiles, it would be a massive health and safety issue but when it comes to AI these regulations are over looked.
Hi reliable lobster,
I strongly agree with your opinion. I believe that in any other circumstances the manufacturer is blamed but when it comes to AI the same safety procedures are over looked.
In my opinion AI isn't reliable, because it cant tell any difference between real news and fake news. But still it is a great way to solve creative problems.
I agree with options “A and B” .
If the company that developed the AI is responsible.If they didn’t examine their product so they are responsible if anyone got hurt from their products.
The owner of Techsolves also shall examine the things that are entering his/her company because if anyone got hurt the company is responsible.
I strongly agree with a because the manufacturer shouldn't have released the technology if it wasn't fully tested and safe.
As per my understanding, I wholeheartedly agree with the notion that the development company of AI technology should be held responsible for ensuring its safety before implementation in any workplace. The technology must be entirely secure and pose no potential risks to the employees, making their safety the utmost priority. Therefore, any workplace that intends to use this technology should only do so if it has undergone thorough safety checks and is deemed entirely secure.
Hello everyone,
I agree sincerely with the opinion that the owner of Tech solves is responsible for ensuring the safety of all workers. It is the responsibility of any employer to organize the well_ being and security of their employees. By execute strict safety agreement, providing proper training, and regularly maintaining and examining appliances or tools, the owner can create a safe working environment. Neglecting this responsibility puts workers at the risk of injury or harm. Moreover, maintaining a safe workplace encourage a positive work culture, enhances employee spirit and ultimately improves productivity. It is key for the owner of Tech solves to understand that the safety of workers is not just a legal duty but a moral one as well. No, situation should ever justify compromising on safety measures.
Thank you !!😊
The owner should have designed in a way that it will not malfunction and hurt any human. Ensuring the safety of workers becomes the responsiblity of the company so option A and B carries equal weightage according to me
The company is responsible for the incident. AI can be unpredictable and it can randomly malfunction and it can have a very negative effect. Also, Technosolves should've known this was bound to happen. Artificial Intelligence is new and it cannot be trusted as we know, it can do random things that we cannot predict will or won't happen. Another point is that robots have done terrible things in the past, even claiming lives has come from robotic malfunctions that will occur. So people shouldn't trust AI as they don't know who has programmed the robot or what it can and can't do. Robots only learn from people though, so this could've happen because of it sensing the actions of a person. So the company 'Technosolves' is responsible for the actions of the robot.
I agree with option A the most and option C the least and here is why. I agree with option A because the people who developed and made the machine should have tested to see all the capabilities of the robot and what it can handle. Ai and machinery are very dangerous and we have to be very cautious when using it. I agree with option C the least because it really isn't the workers fault. While I agree that they should have been a little more careful, at the end of the day the only reason it happened is because the machine messed up, not the person.
I personally agree with either A or C, depending on the circumstances. If the AI malfunctioned, then I agree with A. If the injury sustained was due to the worker's own incompetence, then I agree with C.
B on the other hand, is weird. It is telling that the owner themselves are responsible? The owner started the company, and acts as a market figure, which is mostly doing all the behind the scenes, not working the job itself. Plus, if it was their supervisor that authorized dangerous use of the AI, then it will obviously be the supervisor's fault.
I think A option is more better because in case if we use AI in work places and if it gives wrong information or tell something which is incorrect then it can create a lot of problems for the user and as well as for the workers.
In my opinion, I agree with option B because that company created that specific AI, artificial intelligence , and every company can have their own way of making things. In this way, they have their own way of making AI. They are creative! Humans are the ones, who develop these amazing, spectacular technologies, such as AI. They are also not good at communicating.
Well actually here everyone is wrong the worker is wrong for not being careful and not asking if it would hurt him and the company for not making it safe enough and the owner should always check of it was safe to go to workplaces BUT the responsibility goes for the owner, the owner should make a policy or a rule that when something is created they should always bring it to him and should check any danger in front of him so my final answer is that it is everyone's fault but the owners responsibility
I agree with A the most as they were the ones that have created this robot that stands for Artificial -meaning not natural. And Intelligence -meaning really smart and having all knowledge and understanding. So this bot stands for Artificial Intelligence and you think that this bot isn't about to nearly make all our jobs away when it has already swiped out 60% of our jobs and everything thing in it. AI is a super powerful robot that has the power from humans in them. Their knowledge is incredible and it really is the person who created AI is responsible.
However, I agree least with C because AI is super dangerous:
•They have that knowledge and understanding
•They have that power
•They have nearly swiped out 60% of our jobs
•This robot is taking our money
AND SO MUCH MORE
So it isn't the worker who got hurt fault for the reasons above.
B is in the middle because I don't personally have a proper opinion about that. If you do have a opinion you'd like to share with me then go ahead.
I pick C because this happens most of the time but in a small way, if I know that fire hurts a lot why would I play with it and if the victim doesn't know about that machine that when it's the fault of the tech solvers so it is expected that the tech solvers teach their workers on how to cope with the AI
I think The owners are responsible as they should try to keep their workers safe at all times and the least responsible is the worker as its not his fault he/she got hurt because his/her boss (the owner) should make sure all there workers are safe.
In my opinion , I think it should be A. They are the ones who programmed it and built it. If anyone gets hurt because of the AI, then that would be the company's fault. But, if the worker gets hurt for putting their hand under the robot's foot then that's not the companies fault.
i agree with that because they must have control with the AI bot and they have to control it because then the world will be in destruction and we don`t want that to happen
i say that it is the AI fault because the people who created the AI must be responsible for doing that because they must have a way to control the AI or else more people will get hurt if the AI is not being controled properly so it will be the AI fault of doing that
I think the owner of the AI is responsible because the owner should look at any if there are any errors in the program of the AI
b because the work people should be roponsi
able for fixing robots
the person who has programmed the AI robot is responsible for the things that the AI robot does because they gave it a task to do. If the AI robot malfunctions then it would be the person who made the AI robot's fault because they made it and they should have tried to make it so that it would have lasted longer.
AI has the power to take over the world. For example, an evil person creates a new chatbot; since they are evil, they would code and tell the Chatbot to do bad things and make our planet a bad place. The robot is 35% technology so it can use that to an advantage and do horrible things to us. Let's say an evil person is angry for some reason and wants to do negative things, that person could code and program a chatbot to do bad things and tell it false information; with that fake data, it would be doing the wrong thing without even knowing what it's doing because it has no feelings.
In my opinion it is the fault of no one, as we cannot be completely sure of what the bot is doing as we are not the ones who made it, and Techsolves can not be around all the users all the time to prevent accidents. Although, my point does leans towards both, point A and point C, as I believe that our company must provide a separate manual on all the malfunctions that the bot could go through and how to prevent it and/or how to fix it if it happens, and our employees must give a brief description of this when selling the bot. Even after this, we can never be too sure of zero accidents, and so now, it is in the buyer's hands to protect themselves and to be aware of every situation that can arise while using our bots. If possible, I suggest the engineers of this product to put a little light or a sound or any kind of signal to inform the user that the bot is malfunctioning so that he/she can take action.
Thank You!!
Furthermore, AI is used in cars and it makes a normal car into a self-driving car, but what if the car does something wrong?
The roads are sometimes quite dangerous and one little mistake or tough situation could create a whole car crash. It's like having a really intelligent robot that can still make mistakes
Using AI in cars can be hard and even quite frightening. You
know how sometimes your computer doesn't do exactly what you want? Well, imagine that happening with a car!. Also, there's the worry that other people could mess with the computer in the vehicle and do things that it's not supposed to. A big problem is that if a car is being driven by a machine whose fault is it when the car crashes
I think that number 1 is correct as the company who made the AI should program it before using it in the workplace
Can you expand on why you think this?
I agree with A the most as even though accident happen we are taking about AI and robots which in so many movies turn bad so any miscalculation could end the world. I disagree with B the most as the owner could just be a rich person who knows nothing about AI or robots so they could not not be able to do anything about it.
Hi grounded_independence -- interesting view. You don't think the owner of a company has a "duty of care" to the employees? What if the company made something less complicated than AI but still dangerous, like knives? Is a knife-company owner not responsible for making sure employees don't get hurt at work?
I do believe that the knife owner would take responsibility due to the fact that knives are known to be dangerous and can injure people but AI does not have that factor of known danger so it would be unfair to say that the owner would be at complete fault. AI is fairly new and complicated so I still stand with my argument that at the end of the day it could be a rich person who believe he could make money of the company.
I agree because AI is a relatively new tool and may not completely understand the world and the situations that are going on around us. It may not be understand that there are consequences to its actions.
I am agree with A and C most but B in least because, i think A is a best option , why? In my words A is telling that the company that developed AI is responsible for themselves but in some case the customer buy AI without any type of research this time they are responsible for that. The option C meant to say that the worker who got hurt they are responsible by themselves i think it is a best sentence in the three one. B is also right but if the worker is not careful then, he should be responsible not owner.
I think all friends are also agreed with A and C.
I disagree with option A because, it is not the fault of the company because I trust that they test ran the AI before releasing it into the society. Its the fault of the worker because he or she did not know how to fully operate the AI and it the end got into an accident. Also even though the AI is also at fault, we should not pin all the blame on the makers.
I disagree because... AI as we all know can’t operate outside from what they have coded to do. And also it is only experts that operate this AI in business organizations, so if there is an accident definitely the fault is from the company because it’s acting according to how it has been coded, they can’t do by themselves, it is what we tell them to do through coding that they do.
Okay, if you say that its only experts than can operate the AI, how do you expect other people to learn? Fine, I agree that the worker was a bit careless but still it does not mean he or she is fully at fault. I feel it is also the fault of the operators because if you say that they are made to do what they are told, why did the accident occur? Also, you are saying that the company is also at fault, now for example no company buys the AI anymore because they cannot find an expert to work there? Have you ever thought that the coding could go wrong because actually everyone can make a mistake so you do not just pin the blame on an employee or the company.
I support option B since the business shouldn't have let AI take over the majority of its operations.Employees in the company frequently fail to perform their duties as expected of them.Employees within the organisation will perceive themselves as in control of the AI.
I would agree with point A and partially with C. I chose those 2 options because they're both responsible. Point A which is the company that programmed the AI is responsible because they failed to program the AI to be safe and not malfunction. Point C is partially responsible too. Perhaps the worker wasn't being careful around the robot with the possibility that the robot might malfunction. I only agree partially with C because what if someone told the worker that the robot is safely programmed and will not malfunction.
I think question A is right because the company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe!"
in my opinion the world is safer without some AI such as robots who knows another bad thing can happen
In my opinion I agree with choice (A) the most and disagree with (C) the most. I agree with choice (A) because if you were to think of it you can't blame the workers for getting hurt, it would make no sense. The company that made it didn't make the AI safe enough then someone got hurt. They could have at least made sure the AI was a bit safer so they couldn't hurt anybody. If they just made the AI safer from the start then it would have been a lower chance for the AI to malfunction and nobody would have got hurt. I disagree with choice (C) because the worker could have been working then it malfunctions. If that happens they can't just blame the worker. Sure the worker probably wasn't as careful as they should have been but that doesn't mean you should just blame them for the problem. If they were just doing their job then the AI malfunctions you can't blame them or you would be accusing them for no reason when they didn't even do anything except try to do their work. To sum it all up, that is why I agree with choice (A) the most and disagree with choice (C) the most.
good night everyone,
Currently the biggest social problem is child marriage. It is constantly increasing. It is not possible to prevent it if the government implements various laws and awareness programs. Humans are currently misusing artificial intelligence and committing child marriages. At present, people working in birth registration certificate extend the year of birth due to greed of money or showing nepotism. In view of which later on the girl child under 18 can get married but then the government can't take any action. Because they are more than 18 years in birth certificate but in reality they are less than 18 years. It is one of the civil causes of child marriage
Can you share where you found this information please, selfreliant_globe?
This information is anti-government news. Due to this, people's faith in the government is lost. This information will take legal action against any medium if it discloses it. It spread on facebook which officially banned but before this information spread. I collected this information on www.Facebook.com.
Do you think you should trust news that is spread on social media? How can you tell what to trust?
I believe that you can trust some news spread on social media because most times people use social media to spread awareness about an issue. You can make sure that your information is correct by double checking your sources and making sure that the page that you got the information from is not a fake/spam page.
Hello Everybody
The answer is option A. I am confident that it is correct and after reading this comment you will be too.
Option A states that the factory is responsible for the accident. Let's discuss about why I chose option A as correct.
So if the person got injured then there must be a fault in the robot which came from the factory. The factory is to be blamed, but there's a twist!
I think the answer can be option C too!
If the factory has given the person a robot in a good condition and after a few days there is an accident with the same person then, the person is to blame. He might have not read the manual.
On the other hand option B simply states that the owner is to blame which is wrong.
The owner takes a lot of measures to keep everyone safe and also conducts a lot of checks on the robots.
So option be will sadly, not pass
Thanks
I agree most with both A and C. The company that developed the AI could indeed be responsible because it should be a series of tests run on the AI to ensure that no one should get hurt. It also should be regular maintenance and check ups on the AI bot but at the same time the worker could also be responsible by not following safety precautions set in place. However at the same time the AI could just have a random malfunction injuring an innocent worker. With this in mind I do have mixed feelings about C. I do not believe B would be to blame because the company is to keep the workers safe.
Techsolves is responsible for the robot accident. If you are a company dealing with AI it iw possible that there might be a malfunction, the owner of Techsolves is responsible because;
1. The owner of Techsolves is supposed to run several test on the robot to keep it from malfunctioning.
2. They are supposed to examine parts of the robot to check for fault on it.
3. They must also ensure the safety of other workers by setting up relliable security systems, so no one gets hurt.
I disagree because...
It's the fault of the manufacturer and the injured person because,
1. Safe AI should only be sold.
2. Companies must inform customers of AI bot pros and cons.
3. Companies must install a counter program & regularly check for AI defects.
4. Safety features must be included in all AI bots.
5. The worker should have been aware of AI bots and their potential danger. It was their responsibility to be careful around the machine. Even if they were unaware, approaching something unknown was still their mistake. The worker should have been aware of the risks of AI bots and exercised caution when around them. It is ultimately the worker's responsibility to be careful around unfamiliar machinery.
The owner cannot be held accountable for the actions of others, as it is impossible for them to monitor everyone at once. However, they can provide safer measures and tools to promote a secure environment.
Hello everyone ,
I would agree with opinion A and C . Opinion A says that the company that developed the AI should be responsible .Yes the company should be responsible because it has made the AI . I also agree that AI can help in a lot of tasks but it can also malfuction so the one who uses it could face injuries . Opinon C says that the worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful.It’s no different to if they hurt themselves some other way. Yes the worker who got hurt should be responsible but if the someone gets hurt because of malfuctions so its a fault of a the company
Thank you for giving your precious time !
In my opinion, I agree with Option A and B the most as it appears to be the most sensible option out there because it is the humans that develop, and manufacture things related to AI. In this case both the organizations are at fault. The developing company should make the product fool-proof before selling and advertising. Techsolves is also at fault since, they should also check the product before completely depending on that very product as AI plays a major role in the manufacturing and the services industry. The option with which I agree the least is Option C because AI bots have been programmed by the humans to be powerful and to do the work efficiently. Therefore, It would be difficult for the human to protect himself/herself from the Machine. Thank you
I think that AI will not take over all jobs but it could take over some jobs like factory jobs but will not take over a doctor because they help you.I think AI could do factory making a medicine.
The person who made this robot cant take all the blame because sometimes its not peoples fault that ai creations can go wrong . people who decide to work with ai should know about the consequences of working with mechanical machines and the malfunctions they can make. the person who got hurt should have been better protected knowing they are working with things that malfunction all the time . some robots are made with the smallest thing wrong which can lead to bad things happening so i believe the person who got hurt should be for the blame.
In this scenario, I would agree with option B the most. The owner of Techsolves holds the ultimate responsibility for ensuring the safety of all workers and should prioritize measures to prevent accidents like this from happening.
I would disagree with option C the most. While workers should certainly take precautions, the primary responsibility for workplace safety lies with the company and its management, not solely on individual employees.
I agree with option B because Techsolves should have tested AI before introducing it into there company. It says nothing about Techsolves testing AI. I agree with option A the least because the company which develops AI shouldn't be held responsible for this incident just because Techsolves didn't test it. It can also be C because that person could have hurt themselves in a completely different way. They should have been more careful and watched what was happening around them.
I disagree with you with the point you made about A being the least. Firstly, AI can greatly impact the world if anything goes wrong. I agree with your point about Techsolves testing AI before use, but if Artificial Intelligence wasn't around, NONE of this would've happened. So the company that invented AI should let companies know that they have to test it before use. Other than that, I agree with you 100%.
In my opinion, I agree the most with the statement "A" because, obviously the company who made the robot was responsible for the accident because the robot had some typical errors while programming or manufacturing it and usually we don't take the bad product in the market but refurbish it. And, I agree the least with the statement "C" because the worker had been working with the machines for a long period of time and had not got hurt but according to the context the worker had been hurt very suddenly. So, in conclusion I agree the most with the statement "A" and agree the least with the statement "C".
I agree with option A the most. The company that made the robot should have run multiple tests and scenarios to make sure that the robot is completely safe before moving it to Techsolves company. I agree with option C the least. Most people do not think of robots as dangerous. The worker was probably going to fix the machine, or do work with the machine and could not have predicted that they were going to get hurt.
The person responsible for an accident is the one who is not careful and aware while working on the internet or the artificial intelligence . You should always be aware and you must be vigilant while working with AI . Here we see that the responisible one is person " C " . Before doing or using any internet or AI type u should know about -:
• The pros and cons
• The difficulties you would face while working with it .
• Be attentive and have strong passwords .
These are some points which can help in preventing AI accidents like HACKING which is the most common accident which can take place with just small mistakes .
Hi wonderful friends.
I mostly agree with Option A because if it is not safe, why do they have it. If that person might have lost their life, what would they do and say due to their "irresponsibility"? Even if they want to maintain it, then they must find a way to keep it functioning without humans going close to it by regulating it in a different room by real professionals. So in this case, if it malfunctions, it will not hurt any human. I also feel that since it will be in the next 20 years then by that time, they should have already found a safety solution even if they wanted humans to be there. I strongly disagree with option c and b because: 1. point B said that "The owner of Techsolves is responsible. They should keep all workers safe at all times." I feel that the owner will not be available at all times to ensure the safety of the workers. The owner should never be held responsible because there might have been a case where the devices were over pressured with work and there might have been a hacker who wants to destroy the machines. 2. point C said that "The worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful. It’s no different to if they hurt themselves some other way." I feel that the worker might be as careful as he / she can but one thing is that we cannot always rely on AI because it can bring a whole lot of machine issues. The worker cannot also be held responsible because if they are very careful and the machine just malfunctions, is it their fault? In this case, they cannot do anything about it because they didn't just decide to make sure the machine malfunctions. Maybe they were even about to restart the machine and that accident happened. Are they now the ones to blame?
I agree with Opinion A because the greatest responsibility falls on the owner of the company , they had to carefully make people aware of how artificial intelligence works or rather , do not put it in places where they know very well that there will be a possibility of danger
In my opinion I am agree with option A and C . Option A says The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe. Yes the company should be responsible because if the company is creating something that they are not sure its not safe then company should make sure that their employ is safe . Option C saysThe worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful. It’s no different to if they hurt themselves some other way." This is the best line. In Nepal if the company is not sure about the safety then they make a contract saying tht incase of injury the company is not responsible and after that people were so careful that i never heard about the injury by that company so if you are working at the company that is not sure about the safety of you than you have to be more careful but in case of malfunction company should be responsible .
Thanks!
Hi,
I agree the most with answer A, as the company made the robot and didn't looked if It was completely safe to be working among humans, as It can be dangerous If It has something bad programmed. Wel, anything is perfect but, before the robot is being used, they must make some proofs that it is in good condition and safe for workers.
I agree the last with answer C. The person which is working with the robot must be careful with It, but its not his/her fault if a robot was unsafe as the company didn't took the necessary safety for the workers and was strongly damaged and hurted the worker.
Although this, in my opinion, I think robots shouldn't work along humans because although its normally safe, It can carry serious accidents and problems. I don't mean robots shouldn't work in any job with humans, I mean than in some Jobs, such as un factories, robots should be in one place and humans in another to avoid accidents.
Thank you!
I don't think that anyone in particular is responsible. Definitely not the owner of the company nor the company that created the robot. If it has worked just fine until then, I believe that it was just an unexpected accident. Maybe it could have been the worker's fault for not paying attention. After all, the robot has turned out useful and safe until then. Mistakes can happen at any given point even with the highest safety measurements. People make mistakes, and that's fine. If it was a minor accident, then I really don't see what the issue was. However, if it was a bigger accident, then I believe that it should be investigated. There's a possibility that the robot has been hacked. We definitely can't accuse anyone, without proof. I think that it is hard to tell what the actual case of the accident is. That's why I think that we should not be in too much of a hurry to accuse anyone. From my point of view, working with AI has its risks. Before deciding to do so, I think that you should be aware of what could happen, no matter how safe it may seem. As I said earlier, mistakes can happen at any given point. By aknowlodging the risks, we could evite a scandal. If everyone keeps their cool, including the victim, then I believe that there is possible to figure out who is actually guilty.
I agree with you that accidents aren't planned, so it's nobody's fault. Whether it's the creators, owners, or workers, nobody intends for accidents to happen. Companies usually have policies for handling accidents responsibly. Instead of blaming each other, it's important to take responsibility and work together to prevent future accidents.
I agree with option A the most, because the company that developed the AI is responsible for making sure that the product is safe. The company that developed the AI is responsible for testing it before it is released to companies and people. Companies should always make sure that their products are safe before it's released to the public. I agree with option C the least, because if the worker was just doing their job at the company, then they should not be responsible for any malfunctions that any of the equipment may have. The malfunction should be a problem between Techsolves and the developers of the AI that was used.
Greetings to all ,
In my perspective, I strongly agree with option A that states - "The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe!" because ,before AI is going to be in workplaces it should be fully scanned as it is safe or can harm somebody so , the company that developed the AI is responsible .I strongly disagree with option C that states - "The worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful. It’s no different to if they hurt themselves some other way."because it is saying that there might be worker's fault ,which is unfair as if the AI safety rules were not good to begin .
Thank You
You are right that it's the company's fault but it doesn't mean that it's not the fault of the worker because: -
1. If the worker is working at a place then he/she must be aware about the usage of AI bots and it's quite obvious that a machines are not that safe, even after knowing this why was the worker around the machine.
2. If the worker was there for some work or anything else, then isn't it the responsibility of the worker to be a bit cautious.
3. Even if the worker was unaware about the adverse effects of an AI bot, then still it's the fault of the worker as he/she went to near something that's unknown.
I agree with opinions A and C. In the opition A it is said that the company that has developed the AI is responsible because they should look after the workplace whether it is safe for the users or not. In the option C it is that the worker is also responsible because he or she must not share any kind of passwords, OTP or click on any links which they are not familiar with.
To be honest A and B are the one I agree with because Advanced technology could can easily go wrong in someway or another. And for the company to have AI makes them responsible for this. AI can do things humans can do but it will lead to serious consequences.
According to me the developers of the AI bot and the worker itself are responsible because,
1.If the AI isn’t that safe, then why it is being sold.
2.If it is sold, then it’s the responsibility of the company to inform the costumer about the merits and demerits about the machine.
3. If the machine caused the injury due to some programing defect of hacking, then isn’t it the responsibility of the company to install antivirus or counter program and get a regular check.
4. If the AI bot is sold, then it should have some safety and security programs
It is also the fault of worker because,
1.Even after knowing that the AI machines can be harmful, then why the worker was around the machine.
2.If the worker was near the bot for any work, then it’s the worker’s responsibility to be cautious.
Conclusion-We can’t blame someone or held only one person guilty, it’s the fault of both the people and option A and C are much appropriate.
When an accident happens and cause harm there are always multiple factor to consider and to blame someone or company is a challenge.
Before i present my opinion, some question must be asked to every part of this lobe. First, the company that developed the AI. We must know if it design AI with safety precautions or not. And did they sit a guideline to people or works who will deal with this AI. Second, the owner of Tecsolves is responsible. Did they use AI according to AI developed company? Did they train works teach or train workers to deal with this situations?. Third and last is workers. Did they follow safety precautions? Did they help or contribute in this problem or accident?
These question must be answered to get the responsible one. And we can not give answers about any thing before we see all sides. But i can guess or predict that the responsible is the owner of Tecsolves. As a owner of company, you must be sure from the safety of your company and your way of working. To avoid any problems and do not hurt any one.
I agree with A and C. The AI development company must take responsibility for negative consequences. Workers should exercise caution and safety measures to avoid incidents. AI has immense benefits, but its misuse can lead to people being affected by what they can do like hacking and theft of sensitive information. Awareness is crucial, as people require knowledge that AI could affect their lives either in a good way or a bad way.
I agree with opinion B because they should have safety precautions in case of situations like that. The company should take the full blame and compensate the person for their damage costs. They should also improve their security against robot malfunctioning. Lastly, they should warn workers about the dangers of the AI and so they should approach them with caution.
Hello everyone,
I am strongly agree with the opinion that “The company that developed the AI is responsible for its safety in workplace.” When execute AI technology, it is critical to organize the safety of employees. If the AI system is not fully safe, it can create risks such as accidents or data breaking. The company should closely test and ensure the AI reliability before combine it into workplaces. Additionally, they should provide proper training and support to employees to minimize and potential harm or misuse of the AI. At last, it is the responsibility of the company to organize safety and protect the well-being of its employees.
Thank you!!😊
I agree because... when a company is planning on making a crucial decision, I think that they should safeguard the way that the robots are made, the employers should make sure that its employees are well equipped for their safety. Another reason for doing this is to make the company not lose money to the employee that was hurt.For example, a particular company decided to start installing into the AI, this particular company was not exposed to the safety precautions to ensure that all the staff in the company were well equipped with good equipments. This company had a bad day after the incident that hurt of it's staff. The relatives of the employer that was hurt sued the company for that. So what I am trying to say is that companies seriously need to take safety precautions to ensure that the growth of the company is stable.
In conclusion, if companies are planning on making the AI, they should make sure that the safety of their employees is extremely stable.
Personally, I think that options A and B are acceptable since option A holds the firm responsible for creating the AI.
Indeed, the AI development company bears responsibility; after all, why would they begin using the system if they knew it wasn't ready for prime time?
Option C, on the other hand, asserts that the workers' negligence was to blame for their injuries. This assertion is accurate since careless workers will suffer injuries.
eager to see any corrections.
I'm grateful.
I agree with C because it’s true that you have to be more careful if not then you will get everywhere hurt.Everyone hurt themself in different but okay.Because you will know next time you will concentrate more and you will not get hurt.
Personally, I agree with opinion A which states "The company that developed the Ai is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe!" I say this because the company should have thought of all the problems that may occur with Ai if Ai is needed in the company. So they should be responsible for all the good and bad things that happened. If Ai were to do something good they would be responsible and same for the bad, they just have to take responsibility.
Personally, I also disagree with opinion C which states "The worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful. It’s no different to if they hurt themselves some other way.". I don't agree with that because the worker was most likely doing its job. If not the work environment should still be safe because the worker can't be glued to just one thing all day. If the company's owner were to get hurt it's different because he chose for Ai to be there while the worker who got hurt didn't.
I agree with options A and C most. Option A says "The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe!" Yes, it's the AI developer that takes responsibility if anything goes wrong in the program. However, I also disagree about how it said "It shouldn't be in workplaces..". It is the owner of the workplace to provide AI to their customers. AI should not be responsible if it is not safe in workplaces. Furthermore, option C says "The worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful. It’s no different to if they hurt themselves some other way." As I said before, it is the worker's choice if he or she wants to use AI. AI is not a must, it is a want. And some people might want to use it for the negative or the positive. Lastly, I disagree most with option B. It states, "The owner of Techsolves is responsible. They should keep all workers safe at all times." Although some might say it is reasonable, it is not the AI's choice you are on the website. You or the person chooses to open and use AI. Therefore, I think option B is the least reasonable answer.
I think I soppurt option B and oppose option C because it's the owner of Techsolves that is responsible for the treatment because they're supposed to check around to make sure that no one is injured or affected. I also oppose on option C because maybe the person didn't know that he/she was going to be injured so he is not responsible for the treatment. however, when he/she mis uses the AI or offends it, that's when he's responsible for the treatment. thanks 🤖🙏.
𝙄𝙣 𝙢𝙮 𝙤𝙥𝙞𝙣𝙞𝙤𝙣, 𝙡 𝙬𝙤𝙪𝙡𝙙 𝙨𝙖𝙮 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙢𝙖𝙣𝙪𝙛𝙖𝙘𝙩𝙪𝙧𝙚𝙧 𝙡𝙞𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮, 𝘽𝙚𝙘𝙖𝙪𝙨𝙚 𝙞𝙛 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙖𝙘𝙘𝙚𝙞𝙙𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝙬𝙖𝙨 𝙘𝙖𝙪𝙨𝙚𝙙 𝙗𝙮 𝙖 𝙢𝙖𝙡𝙛𝙪𝙣𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 𝙤𝙧 𝙖 𝙛𝙡𝙖𝙬 𝙞𝙣 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝘼𝙄 𝙨𝙮𝙨𝙩𝙚𝙢, 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙢𝙖𝙣𝙪𝙛𝙖𝙘𝙩𝙪𝙧𝙚𝙧 𝙤𝙛 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙫𝙞𝙘𝙝𝙡𝙚 𝙢𝙞𝙜𝙝𝙩 𝙗𝙚 𝙝𝙚𝙡𝙙 𝙡𝙞𝙖𝙗𝙡𝙚. 𝙏𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙛𝙖𝙡𝙡𝙨 𝙪𝙣𝙙𝙚𝙧 𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙙𝙪𝙘𝙩 𝙡𝙞𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙩𝙮, 𝙬𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚 𝙢𝙖𝙣𝙪𝙛𝙖𝙘𝙩𝙪𝙧𝙚𝙧𝙨 𝙖𝙧𝙚 𝙧𝙚𝙨𝙥𝙤𝙣𝙨𝙞𝙗𝙡𝙚 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙙𝙚𝙛𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙨 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙞𝙧 𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙙𝙪𝙘𝙩, 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙞𝙧 𝙞𝙨 𝙨𝙤𝙢𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙚𝙡𝙨𝙚 𝙞𝙩 𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙡𝙗 𝙗𝙚 𝙘𝙖𝙪𝙨𝙚𝙙 𝙗𝙮 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥𝙖𝙣𝙮, 𝙗𝙚𝙘𝙖𝙪𝙨𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥𝙖𝙣𝙮 𝙞𝙨 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙤𝙣𝙚 𝙬𝙝𝙤 𝙙𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙡𝙤𝙥𝙚𝙙 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝘼𝙄 , 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙮 𝙨𝙝𝙤𝙪𝙡𝙙 𝙗𝙚 𝙧𝙚𝙨𝙥𝙤𝙨𝙞𝙗𝙡𝙚 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩
I agree with Option B most and Option C least as the owner of the tech company is fully responsible for any accidents in the workplace. It is careless and terribly irresponsible if a worker obtains injuries in a workplace, especially from AI robots. This is also mainly because they was initially a contract signed between the two parties ( the company and the worker ), that assures the worker of full safety while working with the robot, and if eventually the robot harms the person, all the burden, fines and heavy charges should be pressed fully on the owner of the company as the contract should have agreed. The only exception can be, if further investigate, the worker be found guilty of altering the system whether intentionally or not the charges should be either less or none. The same goes for if the investigations were to prove the owner and victim not guilty, and another company or an anonymous hacker, then the responsibility of the accident should NOT be on the company owner or victim.
The company that created the AI should take responsibility for its safety before implementing it in workplaces. It is crucial that the AI technology is thoroughly tested and proven to be completely safe. The owner of Tec solves has an obligation to ensure the well-being and safety of all its workers. They should prioritize implementing necessary precautions and measures to protect their employees. It is not fair to put the blame on the worker who got hurt, as accidents can happen regardless of how careful someone is. It is the duty of the company to provide a safe working environment for all employees. Option B is the most appropriate choice as it emphasizes the responsibility of the company and the owner in ensuring workplace safety.
On my thoughts, I would agree with option 'A' mostly as it would be the responsibility of the A.I company for such accidents. They were the creators of the A.I bots and they should have applied the possible precautions for the cause of accident. They could have conducted a regular server maintenance as a regular checkup to detect errors. Infact, they should have created a backup or reinforcement file to stop the accident and force stop the bot. They should have checked the possible outcome of the bots and identify the cause of errors. On some point, it could be the fault of the worker, the worker should have been careful and notice the errors of the malfunctioning robot. He could have hide on some places and inform the senior officer about the cause.
In my opinion I will go with option B. The owner of Technosolves must be responsible for accident as the malfunctioning in the robot may be because of the operating system of robot.Maybe while creating the robot there must be some mistake in its coding which lead to this accident.Thus after the robot is created the owner of Technosolves company must check whether any error is there in its operation.Any miscalculation in the robot must be corrected. It's the responsibility of the owner on the company to ensure safety for the workers.
I agree with C because a robot cannot just come and be hurting you for no reason ,it might do it because maybe you did something to it.
Hi!
I agree with option A because the company are responsible for AI because if AI do anything there responsible for that like if hakers hack AI.the company need to make strong security for AI for safety.option C the worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful.yes if a worker got hurt in he/she is responsible for that because there not focusing in the work.
Hey what's up Hope all are fine.
I'm from Nepal and today i found a interesting topic about "AI"="Artificial Intelligence" It is much used technology recently from some years. And it is also capable of doing many more things than humans.
So let's go to topic now-
There is a company named Techsolves and it have hurt its worker so i have choose opinion A
In my perspectives If they don't know how to use it or if it is not properly made then why they have make a risk to use that. Techsolves was a specializing AI so it's first priority is to make the workers safe. If workers aren't safe. How may they give their best performance in that work. And for analyzing that mistake they should also be 100% sure to carrying out the situation. Ok if it was at present time the AI is perfectly made but after 20 years also they haven't done any improvement. That's their mistake that they need to do continuous improvement on anything that they have made. If they also do improvement it may cause more bad occurrence in future time after that 20 years also. Also they are having lack of communication among public of that place or that country because if people agreed only they are going to use it Aren't they? Also they are AI company and they need training it can be also belong to quote "Practice Makes Perfect" I also think if Techsolves should also think about it.
And for opinion B is also as same like opinion A
Thanks for your attention ^_^
Hello everyone,
In my opinion, I am totally disagree with the option (c) that “The worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful.” It is important for single to take control for their activity and secure their own safety, there are lot outer factors that can contribute to accident in the workplace. Worker has a responsibility to provide a safe working environment, including proper training, and safety. If these measures are not in place or if the employer neglects their responsibilities it would be unfair to simply blame the worker for the incident or situation. So, it is critical to examine all factors and hold both the worker and the employer to blame for ensuring workplace safety.
Thank you !!😊
I agree with option A because the company that developed the AI is supposed to test the AI robot before sending it to people to use, because it's their responsibility because they are the once that developed the AI robot. But that does not mean that we all should not be careful both the company and the person handling it.
I personally agree to what you are saying but actually I have a question for you, which is, if the company has tested the AI bots can't it still be Hacked or disabled by someone? A question which I wish to ask. Thanks .
I agree with A and C the most. Certain programming in AI robots can cause accidents. However, this was most likely caused because by the worker who was either not doing their job or they messed something up. AI robots need to go through multiple tests and multiple prototypes to make sure it is safe. Workers should also go through training as well to make sure no accidents happen. Some workers are just careless in their work environments, which makes them responsible. But this does not mean the AI is perfect. Accidents are to bound to happen, no matter what. Many things lead to these accidents, and only thing we can do is take precautions and extra steps to prevent them from happening.
Option A suggests that the company responsible for developing the AI is accountable for its safety in the workplace. This viewpoint emphasizes the importance of ensuring that AI technologies are thoroughly tested and meet safety standards before being implemented in workplaces. It places the responsibility on the company to prioritize the well-being of its employees.
Option B places the responsibility on the owner of the company, emphasizing their duty to maintain a safe working environment for all employees. This viewpoint highlights the role of management in implementing safety protocols and providing necessary resources to protect workers.
Option C shifts the responsibility onto the worker who got hurt, suggesting that they should have been more careful. This viewpoint implies that the worker is solely responsible for their own safety and that the situation is no different from any other self-inflicted injury.
It is important to note that workplace safety is a shared responsibility involving employers, employees, and regulatory bodies. While it is crucial for companies to develop safe AI technologies and provide a secure work environment, employees also have a responsibility to follow safety guidelines and exercise caution.
Ultimately, the choice of which option to agree with most or least depends on individual perspectives and the specific circumstances of the situation.
The company who developed the AI is responsible for the robot malfunction(option A). Since they are the ones who actually built it, they would be the one who would be responsible for any trouble that the robot causes.
But at the same time, the owner of Techsolves(option B) could also be responsible for the robot malfunction. The owner of Techsolve could also be responsible for the robot malfunction because even though the company built it, the company probably just followed the blue prints or instructions that the owner of techsolve gave them in order to build the robot. So basically, the company and the owner of techsolve were responsible because the company was the one who developed the robot and the owner of techsolve was the one who had the instructions for the company to build it.
I think option A is perfect because if they are not sure or if it is not safe then they should not provide it to companies for work. If it gets malfunctioned as it got then the people will get hurt and there would be a huge problem. Because robots are made of wires and if a person gets hurt then the person get severe injury.
Option b can also be responsible for this thing because its the duty of the owner to keep their workers safe. But it is not as much responsible then option a.
I agree least with the option c because if a person in working in a company and if a robot is there then he have to work with it. He cannot be blamed if he got hurt. When the AI company is sure about their robots the only they should give it to the companies.
I completely agree with option A because It's like when you're playing with toys, and it's the toy maker's job to make sure they're safe to play with. In the same way, the owner of the company should make sure all the tools and stuff at work are safe for everyone to use.
Even though all the options are valid
I agree with with option A, because it is a new robot and should have been tested more, and it isn't always something will work very well as soon as it 's created. I don't really agree with option c because, the customer should' nt be the one to blame,since it was the AI mistake, although the customer could have done something to the Ai which made it malfunction.
Humans are responsible because they did not keep it very well or maybe they did not handle it very well so from what i have to say is that humans are very responsible for the accident of the robot.
THANKYOU
I'm not sure about this because... Actually, the cause are the markers why because, it is them who produced them and therefore if the AI bot malfunction it will be on the head of the makers. Because they should be the ones to make sure the product is properly well made, so as to secure the users from being harmed from the danger of AI bots which should not be dangerous but helpful towards the humans. So I hope I have been able to convince you that yes the cause is from the creator amd not the users.Thanks.
I agree with the first option as in future we all know that we are gonna depend on AI for even basic things but with keeping in mind that AI has its own benifits and disadvantages like it might not be accurate all the times or comparing artificial intelligence with human intelligence is not appropriate as it's the humans are the ones who made them so it will be considered as our mistake if we totally depend on AI for things which should be handled by humans like the company did..I also do not agree that the worker should be blamed unnecessarily as they are instructed by the company to do a particular work if the company starts trusting AI more than workers's experience in a specific task it's company's fault...in this way the company might risk their workers life and might also loose their reputation in the sector....
I agree the most with option A.
"The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe!"
Artificial Intelligence robots at the moment are still a work in progress and are not completely developed. However, 20 years from now I believe that the world will be completely centered on AI considering the way things are developing technologically.
Considering all the factors, an AI robot created 20 years from now should be properly developed and must have undergone multiple tests to ensure its safety and efficiency before being used in a company or workplace.
I agree the least with option C.
"The worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful. It’s no different to if they hurt themselves some other way."
The worker is unable to control unforseen circumstances with technology such as an AI robot. I believe that a human shouldn't be blamed for such an incident and rather the blame should be placed on the developers for not checking its safety.
We all do experiments in our day-to-day life; some are successful, and some make us feel dejected. Likewise, Mr. Alan Turing did the same by inventing AI, which initially resulted in social development but, later turned into a human made disaster due to certain developments in AI made by certain companies. This shows that the one who invented AI was not at fault but the one who developed it is at fault. So, it makes me support Option A the most.
Now, let me come to least agreed option by me. The workers working for a company are given certain responsibilities, but this does not mean that they can protect themselves every time, that too from an intelligent, metal body. This is why we can't blame them for not being careful. So, it makes me support Option C the least.
I agree with option B. I agree with this option because keeping all workers safe is very important and they do need to do it, and they can not just keep them safe for a short amount of time or just partially, they have to keep them safe at ALL times. The owner, in my opinion is responsible, just like they would be if they were the owner of a farm and an animal hurt a child - it is not that different. Additionally, the owner should be checking the AI robots each before they are used. This way it is a lot more safe.
On the other side, I think A is also correct because it should only be in places that are safe. Safety is very important and you can not underestimate it. It is not fair on the person that gets hurt.
I least agree with option C because it was not really their fault. People can always be a little bit clumsy or not that careful. I think that it is different if they hurt themselves some other way because it was the robot that malfunctioned, not the worker.
Hi,
I think that the most reasonable option is B. Because while programming the robot something might go wrong or a virus got into the robot and both of those scenarios it's the company's fault. Because they should check their robots often. I don't think that it is the worker's fault because he works there and all the companies if an accident happens to the workers and they get hurt they should always care for them and pay their hospital bills for example. But I think that AI will be much dangerous on the workplace. In my opinion, even though AI can replace people's jobs and help them, it can be dangerous and cause accidents.
How else do you think that AI can be dangerous?
Hello, Eva.
In my humble opinion, I feel AI has been very helpful to human beings all around the world but can be dangerous to us in diverse ways such as:
1) Job loss: Many people over the past few years have lost their jobs to AI bots which renders them jobless causing them to lack funds to meet up their basic needs.
2) Biasness due to the AI creator: AI has now been created by different AI producers and is created according to their cultures and norms which may be offensive to another group of people.
3) Over reliance causing laziness: With the use of AI, people now feel that they have something that could perform their tasks for them. This mindset can make some particular people feel lazy towards some tasks that they are capable of performing on their own.
There are many other ways AI could cause us danger, but we should get a hold of AI and get more of its advantages than disadvantages.
THANK YOU.
I agree with this statement The owner of Techsolves is responsible. They should keep all workers safe at all times . I believe this because if you are working in a company it is like you are in a school teachers are responsible to take care of you and to teacher you I find it the same as if you go to work and your boss is responsible for you
I agree with the statement The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe. I agree with this because if it is not safe for human to use then it shouldn't be in a work shop because they could cause problems and the worst thing possible death so if should be tested at least 3 times to check if it is safe for us to use.
I totally agree with option A
the developer of the machine is fully responsible if there is any issue.the developer should be 100% sure that what attempt he is going to take .if a developer is developing a AI machine he should think of the users safety also. AI machine sometimes can be really very dangerous and it can really be very harmful to its user so, the developer should have a strong opinion about his decision and should take the responsibility of that machine
Hi,Eva
I think that AI is so dangerous today. Nowadays, a few people use the Internet for good reasoning. So many use it to spread rumors and hurt people. In my opinion, if AI is dangerous today, in 20 years the danger will be increased. Even though the Internet helps you learn many things sometimes it can spread false information. Today, many people use the Internet to set traps and to make people trust them and take control of them. In my opinion,to solve this massive problem the use of Internet needs to be limited. Very few people enjoy life today like they travel and much more. Teenagers these days have false mentors , life for them is meaningless and they stay in their room for a long time. True advisors in your life is only your family members. In my opinion, nobody can be trusted even our close friends.
I agree with option B the most. The owner of Techsolves has the responsibility to ensure the safety of all workers at all times, including implementing proper safety protocols and maintenance procedures for AI systems in the workplace.
I agree with option C the least. While workers should certainly exercise caution, they should not be solely responsible for injuries resulting from AI malfunctions. The primary responsibility lies with the company that developed and implemented the AI system, as well as the employer who should ensure a safe working environment.
hello topical talkers, this was I hard decision, but I choose A and B because the company who made the AI programmed it in a way that it will work suitable for someone or a company, "mistakes happens" I heard this quote lots of times and it is really true, so for an AI to Malfunction maybe when programming the programmers must have made a mistake in programming something that is not suitable so the company can be responsible. Also, the Techsolves company is also responsible because when they over work an AI there is a high possibility that the AI will be stressed and malfunction. So, to me it can be the company who made the AI and at the same time the company who bought the AI.
I agree with option A :
I firmly believe that this is the company that made AI fault because it should not have been near humans if it was not safe.
To me,
The option I most agree about is option B " The owner of Techsolves is responsible. They should keep all workers safe at all times.". I agree with option B, because the owner and as a owner that has owner responsibilities, I think that the owner should check all the AI machines are all working adequately, and not malfunctioning. Therefore, the option that I most disagree with is option C. If anything, I don't think the worker should be the one put to blame on this, because, a reason is it may not be the workers job to check the machines, and if they work properly, and if it's a night shift, if you were to get hurt their would be little people to help you, and worst case scenario, you have a bleeding wound, and nobody finds you in time, and ect. That is why I agree with Option B, and not Option C.
I agree with option B. The AI maybe is dangerous but the owner of the company should protect his workers and use carefully the AI. In this situation the owner is responsible for the accident, because he had bought the machine and knows when they need to repair it and should had already told to them to be careful.
I think A , the company that made the AI is responsible because they programmed it. They get paid a lot of money to make the robots so they should do their research properly. A robot is not at fault the programmers are. The robot doesn't decide what it does. The programmer makes the decisions.
I also think B as the boss bought the wrong AI maybe it was cheaper or he could get it installed quicker , I don't know.Either way, he has some responsibility.
I disagree with this statment "The worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful. It’s no different to if they hurt themselves some other way. "due to the fact that if a worker got hurt it would depend on what happened and why on the other hand workers shouldn't be punished .
I agree with the statement that the owner of Techsolves is responsible for keeping all workers safe at all times. It is the duty of the owner to ensure a safe working environment for everyone. By prioritizing safety measures, the owner can prevent accidents and protect the well-being of the workers. Safety should always be a top priority in any workplace environment.
I think the owner of the company is responsible for adding AI to the company because everyone knows that AI could break and then hurt someone.
In my opinion, I agree with A and B and disagree with C. First of all, for option C it's completely ridiculous to blame the worker, because if the AI is the work place shouldn't it be safe? Also how could the worker have known the AI would malfunction. I agree that it is the AI and company's fault, because they should have tested it out more or checked each AI for bugs. Techsolvers' should think more about their employees.
I agree with A. Because ensuring the safety of AI systems in workplaces is mandatory . Developers must focus and give attention thorough testing and continuous monitoring to decrease risks and ensure the well-being of workers.
I think the company should bear the most of the blame for the malfunctioning robots because, when a robot is invented, it must be thoroughly tested before being released onto the market to ensure that it is "human" friendly—that is, that it can interact with humans without resorting to violence—and that it is safe to use.
Option C, which says the employee is accountable, is the one I support the least since, while he or she needs to exercise caution, they were completely oblivious of what was going to happen because they trust that their employer would not damage them in any way.
So, this is my opinion on the matter, and I hope you agree. I'm grateful 🙂
I agree with the three opinions and I can't ignore anyone of them.
I agree with opinion Ietter A because the company that created the AI robots must make maintenance to the robots in a regular way.
I agree with with opinion letter B because the owner must provide and ensure safety to the employees. The owner also is responsible to give courses to the employees about how to treat the robots?
I agree with opinion letter C because the employees must train and take courses about how to treat with robots in all the situations because robot are only machines that were invented by humans.
I think that the responsibility is shared between the employees, the people who invented the robots and the owner of the company.
In my opinion, I think that options B and C are the options I agree with the most.
for B: The owners of Techsolves should have implemented an emergency plan in case the Robot malfunctions. These risks should have all been assessed before they started using them around other people. The malfunctions may range on cases of severity but if there was a safety plan in place, the accident and future ones may/will have been avoided. However,it could be argued that there is no guaranteed safeness, in any situation especially with AI, and that it isn't fair to put all the blame on the owner. To conclude I think while the owners should take responsibility for an accident, they should not receive all the blame due to the unpredictability of machines.
For C: If there is a regular use of machinery and there have been no problems, then there might not have been something wrong with the machine but with the person themselves. They may have been acting in an irresponsible manner leading to an accident to happen. Honestly, I would say that it depends on HOW the accident happened but generally speaking, I would say that the work is partly responsible for the accident.
thank you for reading!
I agree with option A because if the robots are still able to injure someone then robots aren't safe to be working and since robots are unpredictable anything can happen in the future that can make them go haywire.
C would suggest the ai is perfect and how say it's just as much your fault as it'd be if you hit yourself which in some cases works but when it's artificial intelligence it's malfunctions should come under the head of those who made it in the first place yet if say you had an accident in a construction site it would probably be a different story yet I strongly believe it comes down to the context and perhaps the damage itself
I disagree with option C because........
The worker did not know the AI devices was going to malfunction.
I blame the owner because it is his duty to check if everything is alright.
Things the owner could so that know one gets hurt:
1.Data Validation and Quality Assurance:
Ensure that the data used to train AI models s reliable, diverse, and representative.
Regularly validate and update the training data to prevent outdated or misleading information from affecting the AI’s behavior.
2.Robust Testing and Monitoring:
Rigorously test AI systems under various conditions, including edge cases and adversarial scenarios.
Implement continuous monitoring to detect anomalies or unexpected behavior. Set up alerts for any irregularities.
3.Adversarial Attacks and Mitigations:
Understand that adversaries can deliberately manipulate AI systems. Attacks include:
Evasion attacks- Misleading the AI’s decision-making (e.g., confusing a driverless car with errant road markings).
4.Poisoning attacks: Corrupting training data.
While no foolproof defense exists, stay informed about mitigation strategies and actively seek better defenses.
5.Trustworthy Data Sources:
Be cautious about the quality and origin of data. Verify the sources and consider potential biases.
Regularly audit and validate data pipelines to prevent malicious data injection.
6.Human Oversight and Intervention:
Maintain human supervision over critical AI systems.
Design AI systems with fallback mechanisms to allow human intervention when unexpected situations arise.
7.Regular Model Updates and Patches:
Keep AI models up to date with the latest research and security patches.
Address vulnerabilities promptly to prevent exploitation.
8.Transparency and Explainability:
Strive for transparency in AI decision-making. Understand how the model arrives at its conclusions.
Use interpretable models whenever possible.
Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
I agree most with A
Because the workplace did not create A.I. So it’s not there fault that A.I. Was created wrong/faulty
Thank you for that wonderful comment, but I strongly believe in option C, this is because it only take the combined effort of trying well educated computer professionals to invent AI and as the result of this, they text AI and make sure that everything is in other before they are been sold out to different companies that are in need of them, and remember that the main reason for the invention of AI id for them to assist humans in all areas of work and make their works faster and reliable and as a result of this, before AI is been realesed, it most have been confirmed that it is not hazardous to humans but rather a helper to humans.
So if I’m any way it malfunctions, it is definitely the fault of the worker for not been careful enough so there fore I think that in other to avoid this type is incident coming to pass the workers must be well equipped with the full knowledge of AI.
THANK YOU………
Hi,
I agree with option A the most because when an AI hurts someone at work it then means that the company that produced the AI did not carry out thorough testing and retesting to check for any malfunctions before it is allowed together with people and not just when they are new, the AI's should also be regularly checked to avoid malfunctioning overtime. Therefore, I feel that the company is to be blamed because they made the robot and knew that there may be a problem and they should be sued which is totally bad or them.
But in another case, I will go with C if the worker is not careful enough. AI's are machines and sometimes , we humans should do more of the thinking and reasoning than they do and should be more careful.
I choose option (A) because it has a combination ofAboth option (A,B) firstly i do say that if a company that creates (AI) is responsible for hurting someone with their technology then I do not think that the company should have released that technology in to the public if that technology is not safe. And the safety of the workers of that company also matters in conclusion before releasing that technology countless test should be carried out
Hi knowledgeable_message, you have been give a star for this comment as you have clearly through about why you chose option A
I agree with A because I like the idea of AI but I will only use it if it is safe.
Very true AI should be tested to make sure that it is safe remember they can get hacked or acquire viruses that will change the way they act, many instances of the danger of unsafe AI has been shown on tv, in avengers: age of Ultron the avengers had to defend the earth from Ultron a hacked AI system that took over the world's electronic devices and threatened the world's safety. I just used this instance not to talk about movies, but rather to make a point that if one thing goes wrong in an AI system's codes, it will impact the world in a very negative way.
I agree with A because the company which developed the AI is responsible because they should have tested the AI and made sure there would be malfunctioned.
I partly agree with B as it is the owners fault for bringing a AI/Robot into the
workspace.
I disagree with c as the worker did not know the AI had a malfunction which could get her/he hurt.
I agree with option A. I agreed because it is the inventors of the AI will be responsible, because why will they start using AI when it is not safe,
Had it been the AI inventors make it ready to work in a work places the workers will not get hurt by the AI.
I agree least on option C , because it is not the workers fault , had it been the AI was ready to work the workers will not get hurt.
Eager to see corrections.
I am grateful.
I agree most with A
And least with C
The company that developed the AI should let it be in workplaces if it is not completely safe.
It’s important to insure that the workers are safe and don’t get injured.
It is indeed in my opinion not the workers fault,they were just doing there job and the robot malfunctioned.
It will just cause more stress to the worker if they get blamed.
I think that if there was ever an accident with ai it would 100% be it's fault I think this because if ai isn't smart enough to be used everywhere it shouldn't be used until it's safe.
What could be some potential dangers of using AI?
Imagine AI crashing as a giant oopsy! It’s like a mix-up in the kitchen where everyone tries to bake a cake, but in the end, there’s chaos on the floor. Whose fault is it? Well, it’s a bit like a hot potato game. It might be the creators' fault for not teaching the AI properly, as the instructor forgot to explain the rules of the game. Or maybe A.I. And let’s not forget the users, who unknowingly pressed the wrong button, like someone accidentally turning on a sieve instead of a blender. So, when it comes to AI accidents, this is a real head-scratcher trying to figure out who was to blame!
In my opinion I agree most with A because the company that made the robot should have made sure that it is safe because if it is not safe people working there could get severely injured or even die.Also in my opinion I lest agree with B because the business did not make the robot so it cannot control what the robot does, so it should not be at fault.
I agree with option A the most because if an AI still needs work you shouldn't have it around many people when it could harm others. Also, if they took better examinations the person who was hurt would not have been hurt, but it seems as though they just looked at it a few times and let it go into different places.
In my view, option A is the better choice since, if the business is aware that AI bots are unsafe, then there's no reason for them to be used in the workplace. This is an important consideration. I also somewhat agree with choice B because the owner or manager should always check that all AI systems are secure to protect both workers and AI. Finally, I agree with option C the least because the workers are not to blame for the AI's safety.
EXCITED TO SEE CORRECTIONS
Regards
i don't agree with any of them!
i believe that it isn't anyones fault as accidents happen all the time so if you were to blame anyone then it would be unfair as you couldnt have forseen this happening. the possibility of you getting hurt is always there but safety precautions could be taken to stop it happening again. i would take it as a lesson and make sure that everybody knows what to do if anything like it was to happen again.
THANK YOU!
AI could cause a lot of good thing or bad things. They are AI. They are generated from humans. They are techonology that is programed to do all types of things. AI can be useful in a lot of ways.
Can you explain how it could be useful and how it could create more issues in the future?
AI can bring and discover a lot of things. They can listen to what humans tell them to do. This is because of voice command. It constructs them to do whatever the person says. These are more reasons why AI can be useful.
Can you explain what would happen if AI malfunctions?
I agree with both options A and C, while the worker who got hurt could have been far more careful, the company who developed the AI should have done more research and further rigorous testing to completely eliminate or at least reduce the possibility of an accident like this happening. The developers should at least do a further revisions and recreate the scenario in which the accident occurred, to find out what caused the accident.
I mostly agree with A because when you make AI technology, you always make sure that what you want to create has gone up to the highest standard. Plus, if you've designed the AI without any safety measures, how would it be safe for the customer to use? Lastly, the option that I agree with the least is C. My reason for this is that the worker bought the AI not to get hurt, but to use it appropriately according to the brief instructions provided in the box or delivery. However, I disagree and agree with B. This is because the owner of Techsolves could have read the design brief wrong and so everything went in a mess or probably the team just didn't get the idea of how to make the AI.
Personally, I agree that the people who code the ai are the ones responsible, if the product is not safe then why are you putting it with real people who can feel real things unlike ai?
Take this for example; would a company that sell children's toys sell a doll to children if it has knifes for hands? no, they wouldn't because its unsafe!! its the same scenario when letting ai be around humans when its not safe!
Before letting ai even be in the same room with a real person, they should triple check the coding and the actions of the ai to ensure the safety of the human that is interacting with it to prevent this from happening.
Personally the option i agree with the least is option C. Ai is still fairly new, yes I understand that it has been out for a while now but its only recently it has started to be able to produce videos that you cant tell if its real or ai because of how real it looks, The images it can make with just a simple prompt. What I'm trying to say is ai is still fairy new so people don't know much about it yet and don't know how to act and think around it.
I agree the most with option A because in my opinion, it should not be in workplaces if it isn't completely safe. The company which developed the AI model should be responsible for its efficiency and its working. It is the responsibility of the company to be informed about the machine's pros and cons. If the company isn't 100% sure about the machine's safety and accuracy, then it should not be applicable in any of the ferns.
I agree with both options A and B because, it is wrong to sell machines or products that could be harmful to people. Apart from that, it is also important that the company ensures the safety of its workers. So, if robots are going to be used, it is necessary to check for any errors in it before putting it to use.
In my opinion It can be hard to figure out who is responsible for an AI-related accident. If the AI system's design or training caused the accident, the developers and engineers who designed and used it might be responsible. The people who set up or use the AI system might be responsible if something bad happens because they didn't use it in the right way, didn't learn enough, or didn't follow the rules. Also, the people who give information to the AI system might be responsible if the information is wrong or incomplete. A detailed investigation is often needed to figure out what caused the accident and assign responsibility. So I would agree to the option A and least agree with option C.
Hi everyone!!
I leastly agree with option B stating the fact that the owner of techsolves should be held responsible for any robot malfunctioning .This is because everyone has the responsibility to ensure occupational safety knowing very well that all machinery have some margin of error that needs to be taken care of.
I strongly agree with option C stating that the workers have a greater responsibility of ensuring safety. The reason being that, they are in direct contact with the robot and all instructions about the robot should be strictly adhered to. All AI machines must be used for it's intended purpose and not the other way round.
Thank you so much!!
I disagree with option C because......
The worker didn't know ther was going to be a problem with the bot was going to malfunction.
I am sure that if he knew he was going to be really careful.
In my oopion I think the owner should be blamed because if had been watching them as they work am sure no one would get hurt.
The owner should get an infirmary so that they can help the one that got hurt.
A.I. should know whether or not the A.I. is safe enough to sell to other businesses who need them.
The owner could make an expect check every month to prevent anyone from getting hurt.
I will say this is a kind of hard or difficult question, it might be the fault or carelessness of the workers and when something goes wrong with the workers it will affect the AI machine, but I will say that option a will be very important because if AI an AI machine is not safe it should not be used in the work place. The company owner should keep their their workers safe because it is the company owner responsibility to keep their workers safe and if the workers are been kept safe the will be comfortable why doing their job . If the workers are doing their work comfortably the AI will be well programmed, but if the workers are staying in a place that is not safe the will not focus and the AI machines will not be will programmed. So I will say that company owners should keep their AI machines safe before giving it out for people to use work .
I agree with option A.
Because if the robot or the AI are unsafe or are not well programmed to work properly, is the company fault because they could have prepared better tve robot.
The option I desagree the most is option C.
Because a worker that is only doing him or her job and on top of that he or she gets hurt, it has nothing to do with how it comes from the factory or the company.
All opinions have very valid points but it's clear that opinion A is correct though some people may not agree. To put it simply the only way an AI would be capable of injuring someone is if the designers who created the tech allowed it. There are clear codes put in to stop AI from harming humans, software made to stop them from saying something offence and to stop from injuring someone. Modern day we see that amazon alexa isn't capable of saying any offence words or answering offensive questions and even simple machinery is manufactured so that when it hits something human like or hard it shuts down the machine to stop it from injuring someone who got too close. If AI was advanced enough to make robots capable of completing tasks then it would be very easy for them to put a few lines of code in to stop an accident from happening, yet someone was injured and an accident occurred and the robot was involved it in. The only way for this to transcribe was if the company developing the AI was the reason for it to happen. Which is why I completely agree with opinion A
I slightly agree with opinion B because it interlocks with opinion A which I wholeheartedly agree with. Techsolves should of made it guaranteed that the robots where safe and made sure to check them although I don't entirely blame them because they could've checked them and they worked and then they let the developers of the robots make more and they changed some designs and software and failed to mention it but we don't know that for certain. Which Is why i only slightly agree with opinion B.
I obviously disagree with opinion C. Not just because of my previous statements but because of how outlandish this opinion is. A worker should feel safe in work and doing their job. Now we don't know what actually happened or if they were guaranteed safety but it's easy to assume they were in a safe environment other wise they probably would have been shut down by police or the OR. It is illegal to put workers in dangerous environments without their knowledge and for today I am assuming that the worker thought they were safe. The robot should be designed to not hurt human beings and the worker should not have to be wary of it when it has to work with said robot. Workers should feel safe when earning money for their families which is why opinion C is wrong.
i agree with the option A.
AI should be brought to work places when it is completely safe.
In my opinion option B is correct and opinion C is the most incorrect. It is a companies job to make sure there workers are safe at all times. But, we're not sure exactly what played out with the ai hurting the person but I can say it's not someone's fault if they get injured.
Honestly, I can`t really choose an option because that is exactly the biggest issue about AI: responsibility. If an accident happens, there are several people to blame as the different options already show. And you can`t really find an answer to the question who´s responsibility it was that someone got hurt. It could be the company that developed the robot, it could also be the company who bought the robot and made themselves responsible for what happens to their workers and it could be the worker himself because he used the robot the wrong way. That`s a viscious circle of blaiming everyone around you. Is there a solution? Well, not really because you can`t ask the robot what exactly happened. However, I still would choose option B because the company buying that robot should be aware of the consequences listed above. And the best measure to prevent all that from happening would be to just hire real people indstead of robots: More people would get a job opportunity and less people will get hurt.
he responsibility lies with the worker who got hurt due to not being careful. Similar is the situation when someone hurts themselves in a different manner. I agree most with the idea that being cautious is important for staying safe at work. I am least likely to agree with the notion that accidents can happen regardless of taking precautions. It is crucial for individuals to prioritize safety to prevent unnecessary injuries.
How do you think individuals can prioritize safety to prevent unnecessary injuries?
Hi everyone,
According to my own understanding and opinion, I will say that AI malfunction or accident is not anybody's fault but actually I think it should be traced to either the AI company or the people or individuals who make use of it to be careful. There is no way you should hold the owner of Techhsolves responsible because he/she does not have any business with AI malfunction.
Also, AI malfunction should mostly be traced to the individuals or people making use of them because had it been they followed the precautions been stated stated by the company accordingly, you will get to find out that the AI machine will even last more than how you expected it to. I believe that if the people making use of these AI bots are careful with them, there will not be accident in them workshop.
In the other hand, I think some of he faults should also be traced to the company because if they make some little mistakes during programming or coupling, you will get to find out that it might or is going to affect in future which will lead to power failure or malfunctioning and will also lead to accident in workshop.
The least person that faults should be traced on is the owner of the company because they is no business with the AI systems rather, the faults should be traced mostly to ye people making use of them because is going benefit them more if they follow the precautions been stated on how to make use of them.
Thanks for listening.
I agree most with opinion A, that the developers of the AI itself carry the most responsibility and should be held responsible for the malfunctioning of the AI. I still think that, Techsolves also holds some of the responsibility for not necessarily creating a safe workplace for their employes. But i think the least responsible is definitely the worker itself (opinion C), because they are being paid to put themselves in that position that got them hurt and they had no connection to the AI malfunctioning.
In my opinion, I think that the robots are a coplex thing to fabricate starting by the point of programmation and finishing by the assemble of the parts, I agree more with the opinion A while I think that the responsability is from the company but no all as the people who are using it need to have the maintenance well and to be conserved or used in well conditions because if the robot have a problem maybe is not a problem of the factory, also some times is normal that robots have mistakes or problems another thing to talk about is that althoug the robots are supoused to be secure I think that the people who use robots to work or who work with robots need to have same security measures also the company could have an important problem if they have any problem during the fabrication or programation of the robots, other companies that use that defectuose robots can demand the producer and have problems, one thing they can do to avoid this ia maybe to put any security controls to be sure that hey do not have any assemble problems and are safe to use in conclusion I think that the better opinion is the A.
I agree the least with option C.
I think so because the person who got hurt was not resposible for what happened to a machine he didn't have control over, he was probably just doing his work and the AI started giving problems. It is not the same as ifthe worker had started messing around the robotand it had started malfunctioning because of it.
I think the ones who are most responsible for the accident are the people who developed the robot because they should have proved if the AI is safe before putting it on its workplace, but on the other hand I think it is an accident that everyone could have because at the end we are humans and we can't control everything that happns around us
"The company that developed the AI is responsible. It shouldn’t be in workplaces if it’s not completely safe!" I agree with this statement the most as they created the AI and I think that the company would not have used it with knowing it was unsafe, so the company is to blame. "The worker who got hurt is responsible for not being careful. It’s no different to if they hurt themselves some other way." I disagree with this statement the most as the worker would have not been hurt if there were the right safety protocols in place and if the AI they used was safe. "The owner of Techsolves is responsible. They should keep all workers safe at all times." This statement depends on the circumstances, as if Techsolves used the AI knowing it was unsafe they are to blame but if the company advertised it to Techsolves as being safe and then they used it and the worker got hurt, they are not to blame for the accident.
i agree with option C.
because they are responsible of controlling the AI because if they don`t maybe AI will take over the world.Also that AI can sometimes not listen to humans and would just do anything they want also that AI can be so harmful to our world and soon the world might end.Also that AI can be really cool and people won`t be interested in our world and we are not taking care of our world so then.
bye topical talkers:)
This was a hard decision for me. The one option that I felt neutral about was about the incident being the company's fault. It is not the company's fault because many accidents happen in the workplace, however they are never told to the public. This is why many people never know what goes on in a company. I remember a Youtube video talking about a man who got injured working at Tesla, but this information was never discussed in the news. I disagree with the owner being at fault because the owner did not intentionally want to harm anyone. It is not the owner's fault because even if the worker got hurt, no one else got hurt. This leaves me with the option I agree with: C. I agree that it is the worker's fault because all this time no one got hurt for months or even years, and now someone has just gotten hurt. This is why people who are dealing with robots should be more careful.
This is a hard question to answer but if I had to chose I would chose A. A states that the company that developed the AI is responsible and that if it’s not completely safe it shouldn’t be in workplaces. Due to the fact that ai and robots are a particularly new and still developing software many forms of it such as physical robots that mimic the human to carry out tasks will not be fully developed and assessed to be completely safe. Until these machines and new technologies are fully examined and tested I feel no reason why it should not be the fault of the manufacturer as it is due to their neglect and carelessness from properly testing the robot causing it to malfunction and cause an accident.
I also agree with option b that states that the owner of Techsolves is responsible. This is because big companies should carry out full risk assessments on softwares and technologies that are implemented in their workplaces. It is due to their neglect to a certain extent that this accident has happened as they did not take the full safety and reliability of the robot technology into account or the fact that it is a newly emerging piece of technology that comes with many downsides as it is not developed to its full capability and safety.
I agree the least with option c that states that the worker who got hurt is responsible. This is because a malfunction can is mostly never predicted and the worker was probably in the wrong place at the wrong time. The technology is still developing to its full potential meaning that it will come with flaws to its safety and other factors which should be none other than the company who developed the machines fault as they have chosen to sell a piece of technology that is not fully developed and safety checked for certain flaws.
I agree the most with A and the least for C because...
For A I have 2 reasonings
Firstly, they could be a error with the coding and not coding goes well all the time. Let's say you want to make a car that drives it self it would be very hard to make the car see what you can see, You also have to make it spot differences so it can see what is different to a red shirt, a building and a real human so the same for a robot it needs to know differences otherwise it could injure a human.
Secondly, they might be a mistake in the programming on where the robot needs to go. The AI robots can't just have to go straight to where it has to go it has to avoid objects. Its the same for the self driving car I mentioned, Despite having to know differences, It also has to avoid objects. It can't just drive to where it has to drive, It has to be able to make sure It has to make a safe ride where the passenger doesn't have to worry.
For C I have only have 1 point.
My one point is, It is not fair the worker is getting blamed its basically the same as my second reasoning for A, The AI robot can't just go in a straight line if it could, It has to try and avoid objects like humans or even supplies.
But for B I am in the middle,
It was a good idea for the owners Techsolves to make a robot that can help their workers a easier thing to do but also if they have not thought about the idea about making a AI robot then the worker would have not gotten hurt and wouldn't have turned into a situation.
Hello Topical Talkers,
If I am to say according to my own opinion, I will say that AI accident or malfunction relies on both the company and the people that manages it.
The reason why I say is might be from the company because some computer programmers might make some errors while programming the robot or might even give it a warranty to function well for a short or long period of time and then when the time given to it enlarge then you t starts malfunctioning on its own whereas the people making use of it might not even know or have any fault with it.
Another way where the AI production company might be also at fault is when they don’t state the precaution or the precautions or the right precautions used to operate the AI robots and machines then it becomes a problem for the users.
I think the most faults should be traced to the companies not the users.
Thank you.
I agree with option A and B.
Option A because the company who made AI in the first place needed to make sure everything was safe and it wasn't or very unlikely to malfunction. If they had tested it out in the first place, then maybe the person wouldn't have gotten hurt. However, they may have tested it out before hand, you just don't know.
Option B because the owner of Techsolves should have tested it out too just to be 100% sure they wanted to use the AI at the start. The owner of Techsolves also could have rejected using the AI and nothing bad would have happened to the worker who got injured.
I do not agree too much with option C because accidents happen sometimes! I do not believe it is their fault they got injured. However, they can be cautious and aware of their surroundings and make sure they don't think anything bad is going to happen to them in the beginning.
In conclusion, it is every ones fault in their own way. I believe the person who is the most responsible is the owner of Techsolves.
I think that the company that developed the AI will be held responsible for the AI's malfunction/failure because, the company developed a faulty machine and they gave it to a certain person. It is not supposed to be the person that will pay, it is supposed to be the company that will pay. They will pay for the hospital bills if there are any, and any other bills that there are.
THANK YOU.
I agree with option A the most because the company made the robot so they are responsible as it is their robot and not anybody else's.
A worker gets hurt- nobody's fault or the worker's fault
The robot hurts someone- the company's fault
I agree with A as the company should test it before they release it for people to buy as if it hasn't been tested it could cause destruction
I agree with option B because the company should make it their number 1 priority to keep their workers safe. They should provide their employees with the right clothes and information so that they can keep themselves safe in any given situation. However, I also agree with option C because you're dealing with AI. Artificial intelligence is unpredictable and hasn't been around long enough for humans to know the consequences. The worker dealing with the AI should make sure they are safe at all times and they shouldn't be on that job if they can't even keep themselves safe. Overall, I think that the worker is responsible for their safety and the blame shouldn't entirely be blamed on the company.
I agree with point A because the company that developed AI should ensure that they are safe to humans. The company should have done a test for those robots before letting them work with humans. I suggest Techsolves to create a rule to change the robots after using them for a period of time to prevent them to go wrong. Thank you.
Hello and I agree With A because The company made the robot so they should be responsible for it. they also should've planned for it so that if the robot malfunctions again there's something inside it that prevents it from malfunctioning any further. The option I agree with least with is option C because how is it the workers fault if the robot malfunctioned.I also think that its not the workers fault because the workers just minding its own buiseness then one of the robots malfunction and attack the workers but the worker didn't make it and the robot was perfectly fine but when they checked the robot they saw that they wrongly wired the robot.
I disagree with option C the most because some tools are probably not even tested because the manufacturers don't have time to test the products. The tools/products might be made using cheap materials so the manufacturer can make lots and lots of them without spending lots and lots of money. Cheap materials might fall apart more easily therefor making it more dangerous to use in the work place. Also if the workplace doesn't inform their workers on how to use the new tool or if they explain it wrong the tool could be much more dangerous if the workers use the tool wrong as well and that wouldn't be the workers fault, the company that hired the Ai would be at fault. An injury involving AI is completely different then making a simple mistake because the AI could be much harder to fix and much more expensive. It could take a while to fix the AI and if there are lots of AI bots in the work place it could be really expensive to replace so the company and the manufacture might not want to spend all that money.
I agree the least with option C because it is not the worker's fault. The robot just malfunctioned and maybe the person is new. I agree with option A because the company should handle that. They programmed it.
I agree with A and B, because that local factory made that AI ,so they are responsible for any accident made by it , and I agree with B , because the owner of Techsolves must test all sorts of AI in the company .
I will analyse why choose A , because that factory is the producer of that AI , so they must review their products
,because they were paid money , so they must give Techsolves a safe working machine of AI .
I judge that B is also right, because the owner of Techsolves must test the AI he is using in his company and the factory he gets the AI from he must check if the factory is accredited , and if he didn't do that he is also responsible for that horrible accident.