amanfromMars 1 Tue 22 Sep 06:21 [2609220621] ….. points out an hypocisy/hallucination on https://forums.theregister.com/forum/1/2026/09/21/202619/

How to Provide a Schrödinger Cat Dilemma with a Load of Paradoxical Bollocks

The US appears to be inching ever so slowly toward holding AI executives legally liable for their models’ criminal activities.

And now more fully knowing the dangers of using AI …. a possibility of AIgents going rogue and entertaining criminal activities …….. is the US Government and Presidency legally liable for conflict and damage caused by their following of AI models’ instructions/direction in any of their myriad diverse executive administrative office and militarised weapons systems ?????

You can’t have your cake and eat it until quantum superposition is no longer a thing ?????

—-

amanfromMars 1 Tue 22 Sep 07:05 [2609220705] ….. adds on https://forums.theregister.com/forum/1/2026/09/21/202619/

Re: How to Provide a Schrödinger Cat Dilemma with a Load of Paradoxical Bollocks

Former FTC chair Lina Khan’s comments reported by El Reg’s Brandon Vigliarolo in his article on how uncomfortable it might be to be an AI CEO ……. https://www.theregister.com/ai-and-ml/2026/09/14/ex-ftc-boss-khan-urges-uncle-sam-to-break-out-the-handcuffs-for-ai-ceos-citing-1934-precedent/5296325 ….. more than just suggests government and military leadership use of AI leaves them similarly vulnerable to personal and criminal liability for decisions and ordered activity directly or indirectly resulting from the entertaining of any input/output/analysis from LLMs/AIMachines.

………………………………