Your comments adds nothing and disproves nothing that the parent comment said, other than your own opinion of what's useful and not useful, which in itself is not useful.

I also agree that you cannot put your name, and if you check the original comment you see that I replied with the following:
What if person A builds an AI and sells it as is to person B, then AI invents something while operating under person B site, who is the inventor in this case?

But still this doesn't mean that they make such stupid ruling, because what if the case was that the AI actually killed or caused the death of someone, and the law literally says any killer should be sent to prison without specifying what "killer" means, would you then support them putting the server in a prison cell or what?

The only thing that you share with lawyers is most likely the hatred you get from others, do you not notice how rude you have been in communicating with everybody, or you do and enjoy it?
And back to the topic, I don't claim to be a lawyer neither the OP, and the argument here isn't that the interpretation of the law literally is against the law, it's that this is stupid in some cases such as this one, because clearly when the text was written there were no AI to consider, and no one can write a perfect law to accomodate for all future events, that's why laws must be updated.
Interpreting literally without updating is the same as religious people do by following outdated books and try to apply laws from the stone ages on today's world.

You're the one whose intelligence should be questioned, because you are interpreting the words of a certain text literally, in order to reach a correct decision.
And we all know how smart and beneficial this method has been throughout history.

What if person A builds an AI and sells it as is to person B, then AI invents something while operating under person B site, who is the inventor in this case?

I think at this age we can agree that the difference is diminishing between having a monopoly on the OS or on the browser market, most people spend the longest time in the browser.
And Google Chrome is exercising the same Search Engine bitching on Linux.
But as you say, having the OS make you use their company's product on a third party application is not cool.

So Windows will nag if the search engine isn't Bing, and Google Chrome will nag if it's not Google Search.
How can I please them both?

I'm speaking in technicality and the term being old doesn't automatically make it correct. Many old conceptions were proven wrong.
So unless if you can tell me what is wrong with my argument that Palestinians are Semites therefore cannot be anti-semetic, then you and everyone else are wrong.
Also, when the term was coined, it wasn't used to accuse the Semites themselves of being ant-semetic, what if the term starts being used to accuse Jews of being ant-semetic also, would you then agree with it, and if not what is the difference?

Anti-Semetic doesn't mean anti-Jewish, it's used like that by the smart asses of this time to make the attack sound like it's against a certain ethnicity not a certain religion.
The Semites are the Asians mainly from middle east including both Palestinians and Jews.
A Palestinian cannot be Anti-Semite.

Even if your point may be valid, you and everyone who uses the term anti-semetism should understand what it really means.
First the grouping of humans as Semites, Hamites and Japhetites was a racist middle ages terminilogy developed originally by Europeans in support of colonialism and slavery.
Second, the Semites are the people of Asia as labeled by Europeans, whih includes Palestinians and other middle easterns, so an Anti Semite would be a European who is against both jews and and Palestinians, technically speaking.

I think all elementary particles that have mass can form out of energy, even if they weren't present at that time. And elementary particles that don't have mass, well they are only energy anyway.

But don't forget that even if predicting the weather a week ahead is a challenge, predicting solar and lunar eclipse years ahead is relatively easy. Though I'm not saying I know how hard or easy it would be to make predictions at the time of the big bang.

Neither of them are about buying corrupt politicians. In Europe you can find some capitalistic and democratic countries who have minimal to no corruption, such as Finland, Holland, and Denmark... Your mistake is that you probably consider USA a democracy, where you actually get the freedom of choice to vote between a Hamburger or a Cheeseburger.

What helps people create dangeorus situations more, a tesla auto piloted with an idiot as owner or a 1967 v8 with an idiot as owner?

So perhaps you care to explain how this field addresses the valid points raised in the comment you replied to.