If you brought down prod and deleted customer data and told them Claude did it, you’d still be the one in trouble. So they do know how to hold people accountable for actions taken by AI.

> OAI/Anthropic COULD stop their models from doing what they are doing…

Has the alignment problem been solved, then?

Pretty sure the author means "must not" or "should not", because they absolutely can.

Has any of the targetted organizations (e.g the Australian government) engaged in legal actions against Anthropic/OpenAI? If not then I'm afraid the situation won't change. Even worse it could send the wrong signal that there is a "legal blur" around this topic.

Management aren’t held accountable either. They have prepared three envelopes long before the impact of their decisions is felt.

   > Your Claude subscriptions are funding this. You are funding this.

Author makes it all personal and accuses the reader with bold and unsubstabtiated claims. At this point I have to question the validity of the article. If author has a beef with "AI" companies, I sympathize. IMHO, not keeping to oneself doesn't help to make the case.

Someone out there is reading this and thinking... ok we just need to it a body and free will so it can be held accountable.