Tuesday, July 21, 2026Scoutari
Log inSign up
Sign up
ModelsSkill RadarSavedPersonalizeSubmit sourceLog in
Back to timeline

Mon, July 1307:57ResearchInfra & costPolicy & regulationInfra & cost guide

Thoughts on DRI and LLM Agents

View original

Decision Brief

What changedSimon Willison argues that LLM agents should not serve as Directly Responsible Individuals (DRIs).
Why it mattersClarifies that agents cannot be held accountable, impacting how teams deploying AI agents design responsibility structures.
Who should careAll AI builders
Affected stackNo specific stack identified
Source confidenceMedium · Reliable media or first-hand reporting

Simon Willison references GitLab's definition of DRI, a concept originating from Apple, meaning the person ultimately responsible for a project's success or failure. He argues LLM agents should never be DRIs because only humans can be accountable for their actions, not machines. He quotes an IBM training slide from 1979: 'A computer can never be held accountable; therefore a computer must never make a management decision.' This directly affects teams deploying AI agents in production, such as developers using coding or decision agents: they must ensure humans retain final decision-making and accountability, avoiding ethical and compliance issues by not assigning management or accountability roles to agents.

Summary basis: official / RSS sourceCompiled from the source scope noted above; the original remains authoritative.

Sources

  • Simon Willison：Blog

    Hands-on notes on LLM tools, local models, and practical AI engineering.

  • Simon Willison：Blog

Related intel

留言

登入后即可留言，和其他 builder 交换实测心得。

还没有留言，抢头香。