Who is responsible for the software when AI takes over programming?

  • Thread starter Thread starter symbolipoint
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the accountability for software created by AI, questioning who is responsible for issues like bugs and malfunctions. It emphasizes that companies remain liable for products that incorporate AI, similar to traditional software development. Users do not need technical expertise to engage with consumer products, shifting the responsibility to the manufacturers. The conversation also touches on open-source software, where responsibility is decentralized, allowing users to choose versions and improvements. Ultimately, the accountability for AI-generated software still lies with the companies that produce and market it.
  • #31
harborsparrow said:
You can't tell me that human eyes are going to inspect all this AI-generated code
With the so called 'increased effectiveness' of AI-supported coding the humans assigned will need to watch over lot more and lot less familiar code than ever before.
 
  • Agree
Likes harborsparrow and DaveC426913
Technology news on Phys.org
  • #32
Rive said:
With the so called 'increased effectiveness' of AI-supported coding the humans assigned will need to watch over lot more and lot less familiar code than ever before.
If you've ever seen code from MATLAB's Simulink autocode generation, you know that it is not the kind of code you would want to review. For one thing, all the variables names are automatically generated and obscure.
That being said, with diagram standards that avoid problem areas, massive programs can be generated that are very reliable -- far better than human programmers could do.
 
  • Wow
Likes symbolipoint
  • #33
FactChecker said:
MATLAB's Simulink autocode generation
Nice, but most programmers I know (and are blessed with AI-supportive management) deals with lot less structured/organized/proper code (that lot less was one very polite description of that usual overgrown mess of legacy code mixed with haphazard addons of last minute customer requests and 'seemed to be a good idea' parts).

Somehow I doubt that MATLAB was involved in that Jeep-thing up in this topic somewhere, for example...
 
  • Like
Likes harborsparrow
  • #34
  • #35
This may seem off topic, but it might be related too, since we're talking about the phenomenon of software development managers possibly skimping on best practices to save money.

Remember that Toyota fiasco where cars would accelerate no matter what the driver did? The very description of the phenomenon screamed software race condition to anyone who ever wrote real-time software. Our 2015 Honda FIT has a feature that is actually a bug, where the turn signal, once activated, blinks at least 3 times even if you hit it by accident and immediately turn it off. In heavy traffic on a freeway, that is really not funny.

Anyway, about the Toyota recall, Google now says: "A brake override system was installed in many vehicles. This system ensures that the brake pedal takes precedence over the accelerator pedal...." OF COURSE the brake should override the accelerator. To the public, Toyota continued to claim that it was a sticking physical accelerator, but I think that was a blatant lie to avoid having to admit the problem was software. Because if it was software, the drivers could not be blamed.

End of rant.
 
  • Wow
Likes symbolipoint

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
4K
Replies
29
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
415
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
Replies
14
Views
4K