AI provider liability hinges on pricing, not tech, argues economist Joshua Gans
joshgans · x · 2026-09-22
Joshua Gans analyzes the ongoing cybersecurity game where attackers and defenders both use AI to find vulnerabilities—one to exploit, one to patch. What matters isn't the tech but the AI provider's price: token prices hit attackers, defenders and productive users alike, and providers lack incentives to keep prices high. Liability on providers would alter the game, reducing defence incentives and thus attacker intensity.
More from Safety
- EU sovereignty rules face pushback from defense officials: you can't legislate capability — DavidLinthicum · 2026-09-22
- Gary Marcus: near-term AI risk is deepfaked disinformation, not extinction — GaryMarcus · 2026-09-22
- Apple's anti-deepfake tech signs photos at the sensor and develops them in an auditable cloud — deanwball · 2026-09-22
- Google CISO Phil Venables: Defense Against AI Attacks Needs Autonomy, Not Just Speed — philvenables · 2026-09-22
- Agent did nothing, reported success, and passed: why agent-generated evidence isn't evidence — Muted_Ad_9442 · 2026-09-22
- Healthcare AI Weekly: 100+ experts call for third-party evaluators as sector consolidation begins — HealthcareAIGuy · 2026-09-22