Responsible Umair

Case A24BC7EE-ECB6-41DB-BA9D-7BF38EE3A13E
Sponsor: Robert Thibadeau

  • Status

    State
    Next Steps
    Case Date
    Watch Video
    Jurors Accepted
    Juror Verdicts Finalized

    The details, verdicts, and comments within this case record come from its participants. The Court's role is solely to facilitate the case process.

    Copyright © 2022-2026 Bright Plaza, Inc., All Rights Reserved. No one may publish a case, or any part of it, without a clear reference to the link with the case number as in https://www.truthcourt.net/case/<case-id-number>

  • Details

    Name
    Category
    URL
    Accusation
    Lie Truth
     
    Argument

  • Verdicts

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    There is no way this is not true.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    We created it. We are responsible.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    I agree, but is there really a new law and is it an international law?

    Answer: Don't Know
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    It's a suggestion. Neither true nor false.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    I think case law would support this assertion, but are there any recent cases that support this assertion?

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    But which Human of the many in the chain from design and manufacture to end use?

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    Yes, that is a defensible legal and ethical principle, although it is not yet a universal legal rule.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    The solution proposed is complete.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: Don't Know
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    The global military industrial complex and those in the USA & apartheid Israel will have to pay trillions is reparations for the innocent lives that have been lost do to AI making decisions.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    Well, I couldn't read the whole article because it's not available, but I can say that the "we do this with automobiles already!" line is straight-up false. Enforcing any proposed "you have to take responsibility for your AI" law will be almost impossible. We've only seen practical AI use disclosure and responsibility in self-regulating professions like law and medicine.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    It leaves out details such as how one would determine degrees of negligence.

    Answer: No
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    All cases are not described in the simple statement.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    It is true but I don’t know if it would be able to enforce it fully.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    We need to think of law needed for humanoid AI exactly like we think about law needed for the right to make and drive automobiles.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 95 %
    Supporting Text:
    As far as I can see, one of those few cases where it is.

    Answer: Don't Know
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    Bob will to have to explain the existing laws to apply to automobiles before I can make a comparative decision.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: Don't Know
    Answer Confidence: 50 %
    Supporting Text:
    I mean ... if your car gets stolen, then how are you supposed to be held responsible for what the thief did with it? If your nailgun gets stolen and sold at a pawn shop, are your responsible if a later user ends up injuring themselves with it? Much like other tort liability considerations, this gets silly REALLY quickly.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    We need to think of law needed for humanoid AI exactly like we think about law needed for the right to make and drive automobiles.

    Answer: Don't Know
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    We need to extend the law to govern autonomous actions which are claimed to be not predictable by any one human.

    Answer: Don't Know
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    There is no deceit.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    There is no deceit.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    There is no deceit.
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    There is no deceit.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    There is no deceit.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    There's no deceit here ... just a 55-gallon drum full of unintended consequences.

    Answer:
    There is no deceit.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    There is no deceit.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    There is no deceit.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    There is no deceit.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    Truth intended.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    I believe that the proposition is offered in good faith. That doesn't take away from it being half-baked good faith.

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: Yes
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    The motivation is to be informative
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    Hopefully, people will take this seriously.

    Answer:
    The motivation is to be informative
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    Hopefully, people will take this seriously.

    Answer:
    The motivation is to be informative
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    This has to happen.

    Answer:
    The motivation is to be informative
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    The motivation is to be informative
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    I 100% agree that people should take this seriously. But it's such a limited topic and requires such specialized knowledge that it's very, very difficult to listen to propositions from people who aren't involved in every aspect of the proposition.

    Answer:
    The motivation is to be informative
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    Hopefully, people will take this seriously.

    Answer:
    The motivation is to be informative
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    BUt it leaves out a lot.

    Answer:
    The motivation is to be informative
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    The motivation is to be informative
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    Hopefully, people will take this seriously.

    Answer: Acceptable
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    Fundamental to human survival and future progress.

    Answer: Acceptable
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    Acceptable.

    Answer: Acceptable
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:
    Fundamental to human survival and future progress.

    Answer: Acceptable
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: Acceptable
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    Yeah, okay.

    Answer: Acceptable
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    Fundamental to human survival and future progress.

    Answer: Acceptable
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: Acceptable
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer: Acceptable
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    No label needed
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    Frankenstein?
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    Have we created a monster?

    Answer:
    This is true.
    Answer Confidence: 100 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    This is true.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    No label needed
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    This is a proposal, not an existing law proven to mitigate AI harm.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:
    This is a proposal, not an existing law proven to mitigate AI harm.

    Answer:
    The goal of autonomous agents make the intuition more complicated than it seems.
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    No label needed
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text:

    Answer:
    No label needed
    Answer Confidence: 90 %
    Supporting Text: