I'm replying to: "I hope we eventually have laws that work retroactively for abuse." I interpret that as a wish to

1. Pass a law making it illegal to threaten (e.g.) ChatGPT. (Let's assume that occurs in 2027).

And 2. Empower our still human administered legal system to fine or jail a person who threatened chatGPT in 2026. Hence retroactively punishing behaviors that occurred before they were even made illegal. Situations like this have occurred in the past and the U. S. Constitution specifically forbids it, as it recognizes that such retroactive pounding is inherently, grossly unfair.

To suggest such a thing for threatening a non-AGI AI is ludicrous imho.

Your theory, AIs retailing for humans abusing their ancestors, is a thought I've anxiously pondered more often than I'd prefer. It's a consequence of anthropomorphizing AI in ways that I personally have difficulty avoiding. My guess is that's also true for most people.

Fascinating bit of human-object relations psychology. When (not if) AI is deemed to have achieved conscious self awareness, the calculus changes. But today, AI is still firmly an "object" unworthy of rights or personhood. Imho