←back to thread

693 points jsheard | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
blibble ◴[] No.45093155[source]
the "AI" bullshitters need to be liable for this type of wilful defamation

and it is wilful, they know full well it has no concept of truthfulness, yet they serve up its slop output directly into the faces of billions of people

and if this makes "AI" nonviable as a business? tough shit

replies(1): >>45093360 #
gruez[dead post] ◴[] No.45093360[source]
[flagged]
oxguy3 ◴[] No.45093489[source]
The AI summaries in Google aren't presented as wild hallucinations; they show up in an authoritative looking box as an answer to the query you just typed. The New York Times wouldn't be able to get out of libel suits by adding a tiny disclaimer to their masthead; why should it be different for Google?
replies(1): >>45093534 #
gruez[dead post] ◴[] No.45093534[source]
[flagged]
1. oxguy3 ◴[] No.45093763{4}[source]
Fortune tellers typically tell you extremely vague things that are designed to trick you into interpreting them favorably; you hear what you want to hear. "Someone new will come into your life soon" or "Something exciting will happen next week" are not claims that can be disproved.

They certainly don't make hyperspecific claims like "this YouTuber traveled to Israel and changed his mind about the war there, as documented in a video he posted on August 18".

replies(1): >>45093838 #
2. ◴[] No.45093838[source]