[Lerc]

>No AI has accountability so also should not own any benefits

That doesn't follow at all. A baby doesn't have accountability, but has benefits.

I'm all for accountability being required for important descion making. I too wouldn't let babies make similar descisions.

This non sequitur just makes it sound like you're throwing around talking points and getting them mixed up.

[tossandthrow]

What benefits does a baby hold? Can a baby freely open a bank account, start a company, get married?

A baby has the benefit of being attended their basic needs. Just like Ai is also being fed power.

[Lerc]

A baby probably can't open a bank account, but that would be a descision based restriction.

Many babies have bank accounts given to them.

Quite a lot of them benefit from a roof over their head.

>Just like Ai is also being fed power.

How is that relevant to what sebastianconcpt said?

[sebastianconcpt]

I find your suggestion to equate a baby to AI brutally uncanny

[Lerc]

If you say x has property y therefore z then you would have to accept that z or anything that has that property y.

Noting two things share a property is not equavalence,

A whale and an Exocet missile both have mass, that says nothing about their other properties.

Unless you think babies can be held accountable for their actions, your argument is simply invalid.

[sebastianconcpt]

You are mixing legalism with reality. All babies (and more) are accountable to physics.