Re KYC: if liability is concentrated on an upstream LLM vendor, you would predict a higher bar of gatekeeping applied to downstream API consumers. So the median gpt app would be much closer to duolingo than to an edgy poetry collective. If liability falls only to end-users, LLM vendors would keep gatekeeping rather low.
This itself is a cost-benefit calculation, thinking through different definitions of “democratized AI” and “equitable access” and figuring out which class of mistakes is preferable.
“Who foots the bill for compliance?” is a fun incentive alignment puzzle!
Yeah, I’m a fan of joint and several liability for LLMs that includes any party which was not explictly stopping a use of the LLM for something that causes harms, for exactly this reason.
Re KYC: if liability is concentrated on an upstream LLM vendor, you would predict a higher bar of gatekeeping applied to downstream API consumers. So the median gpt app would be much closer to duolingo than to an edgy poetry collective. If liability falls only to end-users, LLM vendors would keep gatekeeping rather low.
This itself is a cost-benefit calculation, thinking through different definitions of “democratized AI” and “equitable access” and figuring out which class of mistakes is preferable.
“Who foots the bill for compliance?” is a fun incentive alignment puzzle!
Yeah, I’m a fan of joint and several liability for LLMs that includes any party which was not explictly stopping a use of the LLM for something that causes harms, for exactly this reason.