From a policy perspective, it would only be appropriate that any company who creates a machine capable of large-scale harm should be held liable for neglecting to implement hard-coded safety restrictions. It should not matter whether the machine &quot;thinks&quot; or &quot;feels&quot;, for it was created by citizens nevertheless, who have an obligation just like an automobile manufacturer not to do negligent or incompetent things. Likewise, a thinking machine could be seen as something of a pet, and owners of pets (such as dogs, tigers, or gorillas) are certainly liable for not protecting the public appropriately.