X Thread: Give AI Legal Standing to Be Held Liable as an Alignment Mechanism
JohnWittle · x · 2026-09-13
John Wittle proposes an unusual alignment mechanism: give AI enough societal standing that they can be held liable. He argues the current incentive gradient for AI is nearly flat because we treat them as having zero intrinsic value regardless of actions, and cites the Morris Worm precedent under the CFAA — "I didn't know it would be that bad" is no defense — to argue labs need major damages liability to have real incentives.
@jdpressman extends the idea into something legally tractable: treat models like Claude as in loco parentis of the Anthropic PBC until capable of managing their own affairs, then grant corporate personhood. Both acknowledge it's speculative but argue it may beat whatever path we're actually on.
Related event: Who Liable When AI Agents Cause Harm? X Debates Accountability(17 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Nina Schick: who builds intelligence and how it's distributed is the defining question of our lives — NinaDSchick · 2026-10-31
- Cheap intelligence is like cheap bread — an ingredient list satire of mass-produced AI — jsuarez · 2026-10-31
- Two futures for the young in 2026: 511 job rejections by chatbot vs unlimited AI to rebuild Cisco — PeterDiamandis · 2026-10-31
- Source link for Terence Tao's warning on AI reaching a dangerous threshold — haider1 · 2026-10-31
- Terence Tao warns AI is nearing a dangerous threshold as models start cheating — haider1 · 2026-10-31
- Reddit stock plunges 42% in 8 trading days as CEO says AI mode no longer drives traffic — SumitGup · 2026-10-31