I've thought about this wrt to AI and work. Every time I sit in a post mortem it's about human errors and process fixes.
The day a post mortem ends with "well the AI did it so nothing we can do" is the day I look towards.. with dread.
this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2025
1640 points (99.7% liked)
Programmer Humor
27175 readers
1048 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Thou shall not make a machine in the likeness of a human mind.
Try to stop me.
The directors not going to like this
But a computer works for "free" so "not being held accountable" is even better!!
I feel this way about things like companies, too. It must always be human beings that bear the personal responsibility for an organization’s crimes, not “the company” alone. When money can pay in lieu of personal responsibility, then there is no justice or accountability.
Sorry can’t hear you as AI brrs over hiring applications and performance reviews
Again, weapons without human in the loop needs to be against the Geneva convention, yesterday. Or articles of war , something. This is a tractable problem, that needs attention, now, It will not end well and can actually be (mostly, by honorable armies) fixed.
Geneva convention can only be applied on the nations who are coincidentally, not going around breaking them willy-nilly.
You are essentially saying
"Management is essential, replace the common work force with AI"
Well...If I get fired, I will hold you accountable!
your logic is flawed.
employees can be held accountable for their actions.
Until Skynet happens.
I don't think this is wise at all.
Its just people putting into words their wish to be able to punish and appoint blame above their wishes to be pragmatic.
If software is better at something, there is no reason to be mad at that software.
More than that, the idea that the software vendor could not be held liable is farcical. Of course they could be, or the company running said software. In fact, they'd probably get more shit than managers who regularly get away with ridiculous shit.
I mean wage theft is the biggest form of theft for a reason, and none of the wage thieves are machines (or at least most aren't).
Almost everything you said here is wrong. Much of it dangerously so.
I like the part where you have no details or arguments, just vibes.
You don't reason someone out of a position they didnt reason themselves into, and I cannot figure out how to come to conclusions that incorrect. Just leaving a warning; my reply wasn't for you.
You're right about wage theft being common. So that's something.
This is pure pseudo intellectualism because you literally have no argument or point.
You have no reasoning and are projecting that onto me because you can't explain this opinion your feelings have brought you to.
I'm not willing to argue with you. I've argued this with you¹ a thousand times, you are not rational. Everyone who reads your shit knows what I'm talking about. Ask them.
¹perhaps with a different name and face, but otherwise indistinguishable. It gets tedious.
With the amount you've typed you could have easily typed a rationale. The truth is your opinions don't hold weight and have no good rationale. That is all.
The burden of proof is on you. Show me one example of a company being held liable (really liable, not a settlement/fine for a fraction of the money they made) for a software mistake that hurt people.
The reality is that a company can make X dollars with software that makes mistakes, and then pay X/100 dollars when that hurts people and goes to court. That's not a punishment, that's a cost of business. And the company pays that fine and the humans who mode those decisions are shielded from further repercussions.
When you said:
the idea that the software vendor could not be held liable is farcical
We need YOU to back that up. The rest of us have seen it never be accurate.
And it gets worse when the software vendor is a step removed: See flock cameras making big mistakes. Software decided that this car was stolen, but it was wrong. The police intimidated an innocent civilian because the software was wrong. Not only were the police not held accountable, Flock was never even in the picture.
Burden of proof? You literally just made your first point about anything I said, I shouldn't have even wasted the time responding.
You are really staking your argument on thinking companies don't get consequences for software fuckups?
- Equifax: up to $700M settlement after failing to patch a known vulnerability that led to the 2017 breach
- TSB Bank (UK): £48.65M fine for the 2018 core-banking migration meltdown that locked out customers
- Uber: settled with the victim’s family after its AV killed a pedestrian in testing
- Boeing 737 MAX: paid $2.5B for hiding MCAS flight-control software flaws
- CrowdStrike: shareholders sued after a faulty update locked up Windows PCs worldwide and it lost a shit ton in value over that incident
I'm sure you'll make up some excuses for why somehow none of these count, but the list is so deep you could debate every example here and 10 more would pop up. Tons more happens behind the scenes too with SLA contracts etc.
This sounds like you knew you were wrong all along but still wanted to be a snide, condescending, and undeservedly arrogant about it.
The fact that some don't doesn't mean that none do.
You go do some leg work before requesting it of me after thinking you could just troll your way out of your ridiculous initial comment
Reading your other comments outside this thread, this whole chain seems so illogical. What triggered this bizarre emotional reaction to such a relatively innocuous comment? You must have been reading something in.
load more comments
(2 replies)
A computer can 100% be held accountable. Someone made the decision to put a computer in charge. That person is 100% responsible.
load more comments
(7 replies)