[kogus]

This is pithy, but wrong. Management decisions are not the only important decisions. Also, the whole point of computers is to crystallize human thought into action, and take that action on a larger and faster scale than people can achieve. Airplane autopilots make many important decisions.

I'd suggest a lesson that might be less agreeable to IBM, Microsoft, Google, et al:

"The makers of software must be accountable for the mistakes made by that software."

[fargle]

"The users of software must be accountable for the mistakes made by that software."

the contract between user and "maker" should be requirements. if a machine does not fulfill its requirements, it can be the maker's responsibility, for example a flight instrument that failed to report correct information.

but if you choose to use a piece of software that says "we actually guarantee nothing", which is the vast majority of it, then it's definitely the user's responsibility for choosing to use such a tool.

[kogus]

That's a good distinction. A knife maker should not be liable for the serial killer who used their product. But they probably should be liable if the knife explodes when used to cut a piece of cheese.

I'm sure there is a whole library full of legal precedent around "who is liable, and when". My earlier point was really that "Machines are not accountable" does not mean "Machines cannot make decisions". It really means "We need to think about who is accountable when this machine makes a mistake.