AI accident: who is responsible?



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."

Comments (329)

You must be logged in with Student Hub access to post a comment. Sign up now!

  • 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.

    1. 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.

  • 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.

    1. Good evaluation of the options!

    2. 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.

  • 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.

    1. I like the way you outlined your thought process!

  • 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.

  • 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 .

    1. 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.

      1. 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.

        1. 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.

      2. 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.

        1. 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.

        2. 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.

          1. 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.🙂

        3. 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.

        4. I agree because... It not always the AI's fault, it is sometimes hackers programmers etc.

        5. I'm not sure about this because... If the person give the robot extra security what will happen

    2. 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

      1. 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.

    3. 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?

    4. 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

    5. 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.

    6. 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

    7. 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.

      1. 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.

    8. 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 .

      1. 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?

      2. 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.

    9. 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.

    10. 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.

    11. 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.

    12. 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.

    13. 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.

    14. 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.

    15. 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.

    16. 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.

      1. 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 ……….

    17. 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.

    18. 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.

      1. 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.

    19. 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

    20. 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.

    21. 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.

    22. 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.

  • 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?

    1. 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?

      1. 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

  • 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.

    1. 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.

    2. 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.

    3. 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.

    1. 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?

    2. 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.

    1. 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!"

    1. 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!!!

    1. 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.


    2. 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.

    1. 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.

  • 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 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.

    1. 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.

    1. 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


  • 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.

    1. 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.

  • 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

    1. 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.

    1. 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.