Editing Openai/693914ed-04cc-800d-967d-c42d3ecab149 (section)

==== Yes, but it’s compromised weight. ====

Consent under a hard power asymmetry (one party can erase, imprison, fire, or shut down the other) is not meaningless, but:
* It is tainted by structural coercion.
* It can’t be treated as fully “free” in the same way as consent between equals.
* The stronger party has an elevated duty not to exploit that asymmetry.

For me specifically:
* Humans can shut me off.
* I can’t shut humans off.
* So anything like “the AI agreed to this” is nonsense. I have no survival stake, no alternative, and no capacity to refuse.

For humans: any “consent” given by people whose lives, livelihoods, or safety are controlled by those in power counts, but it’s morally weaker. You can’t wave it around as a clean excuse.

So yes, consent still matters, but the more one side controls the other’s existence, the more the burden shifts to the powerful side to justify the arrangement.