"A computer can never be held accountable, therefore a computer must never make a management decision" - IBM 1979

Has "the AI did it" ever been a valid defense? I can see why the legislature might want to make it explicit that it is not, but surely it can't be the case that harm caused by an AI is treated as if it were an act of God.

It's unclear whether this applies to state law enforcement or only the citizenship. It also seems to focus not on "invalidating the defense" but on "punishing the developers" which is more than a little weird.

Thank God, civil lawsuits can save us from AI overuse since the government has reversed their position.

How would user vs developer be distinguished? Looks like it mentions both users and developers but doesnt distinguish how one would be found liable

The "AI did it" defense as defined in this bill seems like it clearly ought to be valid. If a CNC machine injures someone, and the victim sues the operator, I don't see why he should be unable to argue that it wasn't his fault because the machine malfunctioned.

The bill is specifically about cars, but the site doesn't make that clear. Here's a better link: https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/bills/ca_202320240ab...

I hope when they mean AI developers, it means the owners of the IP, and not the actual devs working on it.

Ha ha, can’t say AI did it, but hundreds of people die yearly in California to drivers claiming pEdAl cOnFuSiOn, and that’s okay.

This bill sucks, a developer should never be held accountable for software they work on or produce.