Connect your Claude, Codex or OpenClaw for full transcripts on millions of podcasts. Two week free trial, cancel anytime.
Start free trial →Tomorrow, Today · October 2026
Pressed on who is responsible when an AI agent does something its authorizing human never intended, the identity-governance executive argues accountability must still land on a person.
…things here like policy, right? There's a policy engine, there's a risk engine, there's an intent engine, right? All of these things are going to play into a risk analysis that you're going to get for these agents, right? Now, the author is the authorization still comes from the person, the human.
The behavior didn't come from the person.
The behavior, the more complex these models get. So, you talked about nested, right? I think there's always going to be these unintended consequences that come out of this on things that they do that were completely unintended. And I don't think you're going to get away from that. I think that the more and more complexities get, you're going to be dealing with that. And I think at the end of the day, you have to have some level of accountability. Yeah. Right. And, you know, we like to say, you know, you're not going to put a Waymo in jail.
Yeah. Yeah. See, so, okay, that's where I was headed.
Yeah.
So you, you definitely cannot put Waymo in jail. Neither you can fire the algorithm which powers Uber, which discriminates drivers sometimes. Right? So let's get that right, right? So, so in the world of AI Agents is so crucial, but the consequences for that pan action doesn't seem to me like you…