Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. A court in Munich declared that Google is liable for their "AI summaries" and all its hallucinations.

A court in Munich declared that Google is liable for their "AI summaries" and all its hallucinations.

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
75 Indlæg 53 Posters 1 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • tante@tldr.nettime.orgT tante@tldr.nettime.org

    A court in Munich declared that Google is liable for their "AI summaries" and all its hallucinations. This is an important step to bring "AI" slop in line with all other products on the market: "AI" products are basically the only ones where a provider can just deliver unchecked garbage and put all the liability on the consumer. I hope to see aggressive change here.

    https://the-decoder.com/landmark-german-ruling-declares-googles-ai-overviews-are-googles-own-words-and-makes-it-liable-for-false-answers/

    ozzelot@mstdn.socialO This user is from outside of this forum
    ozzelot@mstdn.socialO This user is from outside of this forum
    ozzelot@mstdn.social
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #3

    @tante
    I also hope they don't say "chatbots can make mistakes", because epistemologically, they cannot. They do not pursue trueness.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • hllizi@hespere.deH hllizi@hespere.de

      @tante wow, I hope this holds up.

      hllizi@hespere.deH This user is from outside of this forum
      hllizi@hespere.deH This user is from outside of this forum
      hllizi@hespere.de
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #4

      @tante also, how would the "do your fact checking yourself"-approach work at all once the plan to eliminate links is enacted? Maybe making your bullshit all that transparent isn't the best move.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • tante@tldr.nettime.orgT tante@tldr.nettime.org

        A court in Munich declared that Google is liable for their "AI summaries" and all its hallucinations. This is an important step to bring "AI" slop in line with all other products on the market: "AI" products are basically the only ones where a provider can just deliver unchecked garbage and put all the liability on the consumer. I hope to see aggressive change here.

        https://the-decoder.com/landmark-german-ruling-declares-googles-ai-overviews-are-googles-own-words-and-makes-it-liable-for-false-answers/

        iamlayer8@mastodon.socialI This user is from outside of this forum
        iamlayer8@mastodon.socialI This user is from outside of this forum
        iamlayer8@mastodon.social
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #5

        @tante
        They could flag it as comedy or satire

        timotimo@peoplemaking.gamesT 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • tante@tldr.nettime.orgT tante@tldr.nettime.org

          A court in Munich declared that Google is liable for their "AI summaries" and all its hallucinations. This is an important step to bring "AI" slop in line with all other products on the market: "AI" products are basically the only ones where a provider can just deliver unchecked garbage and put all the liability on the consumer. I hope to see aggressive change here.

          https://the-decoder.com/landmark-german-ruling-declares-googles-ai-overviews-are-googles-own-words-and-makes-it-liable-for-false-answers/

          revoltingpuppets@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
          revoltingpuppets@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
          revoltingpuppets@mastodon.social
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #6

          @tante This is getting really interesting. First the chatbots and now the "Ai search results". The faulty design starts to show and become useless if they can get sued for every misinformation. It will be easier to train humans for this jobs, at least you can yell at them when the fuck up 🙂

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • tante@tldr.nettime.orgT tante@tldr.nettime.org

            A court in Munich declared that Google is liable for their "AI summaries" and all its hallucinations. This is an important step to bring "AI" slop in line with all other products on the market: "AI" products are basically the only ones where a provider can just deliver unchecked garbage and put all the liability on the consumer. I hope to see aggressive change here.

            https://the-decoder.com/landmark-german-ruling-declares-googles-ai-overviews-are-googles-own-words-and-makes-it-liable-for-false-answers/

            gimulnautti@mastodon.greenG This user is from outside of this forum
            gimulnautti@mastodon.greenG This user is from outside of this forum
            gimulnautti@mastodon.green
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #7

            @tante ”A German court has ruled that Google is directly liable for what its AI search overviews say. Previous case law shielding search engine operators from liability doesn't apply to AI overviews.”

            This is the correct action to take. You are operating a technology that produces this information. You are not connecting people to somebody else’s voice.

            herman@mastodon.worldH 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • tante@tldr.nettime.orgT tante@tldr.nettime.org

              A court in Munich declared that Google is liable for their "AI summaries" and all its hallucinations. This is an important step to bring "AI" slop in line with all other products on the market: "AI" products are basically the only ones where a provider can just deliver unchecked garbage and put all the liability on the consumer. I hope to see aggressive change here.

              https://the-decoder.com/landmark-german-ruling-declares-googles-ai-overviews-are-googles-own-words-and-makes-it-liable-for-false-answers/

              sl007@digitalcourage.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
              sl007@digitalcourage.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
              sl007@digitalcourage.social
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #8

              @tante

              Just wanted to look for my SPIEGEL pictures of Nazi Klar, pissed at a demo.
              It was a short while ago after he was caught.

              google answered that I am not a RAF terrorist.

              Do I get compensation?

              [de]

              tante@tldr.nettime.orgT 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • sl007@digitalcourage.socialS sl007@digitalcourage.social

                @tante

                Just wanted to look for my SPIEGEL pictures of Nazi Klar, pissed at a demo.
                It was a short while ago after he was caught.

                google answered that I am not a RAF terrorist.

                Do I get compensation?

                [de]

                tante@tldr.nettime.orgT This user is from outside of this forum
                tante@tldr.nettime.orgT This user is from outside of this forum
                tante@tldr.nettime.org
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #9

                @sl007 "helpful"

                sl007@digitalcourage.socialS 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • tante@tldr.nettime.orgT tante@tldr.nettime.org

                  @sl007 "helpful"

                  sl007@digitalcourage.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                  sl007@digitalcourage.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
                  sl007@digitalcourage.social
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #10

                  @tante

                  yeah, "helpful" was a month before when it showed me the image I searched for.

                  This search returned 0 results and 3 wrong connections 😉

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • pelle@veganism.socialP pelle@veganism.social shared this topic
                  • tante@tldr.nettime.orgT tante@tldr.nettime.org

                    A court in Munich declared that Google is liable for their "AI summaries" and all its hallucinations. This is an important step to bring "AI" slop in line with all other products on the market: "AI" products are basically the only ones where a provider can just deliver unchecked garbage and put all the liability on the consumer. I hope to see aggressive change here.

                    https://the-decoder.com/landmark-german-ruling-declares-googles-ai-overviews-are-googles-own-words-and-makes-it-liable-for-false-answers/

                    theeclecticdyslexic@mstdn.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                    theeclecticdyslexic@mstdn.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                    theeclecticdyslexic@mstdn.social
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #11

                    @tante This is the kind of thing I couldn't have come up with, because I would never have considered what the LLM is spitting out to be Google's words.

                    Guess there is no real way out. They get what they wanted and I isn't legally theft (however incompetent)... but now it's their words so guess they are responsible.

                    Look forward to how they try to fight this one. Sorry it's not our words, we actually stole the entirety of human creation.

                    noodlemaz@mstdn.gamesN 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • iamlayer8@mastodon.socialI iamlayer8@mastodon.social

                      @tante
                      They could flag it as comedy or satire

                      timotimo@peoplemaking.gamesT This user is from outside of this forum
                      timotimo@peoplemaking.gamesT This user is from outside of this forum
                      timotimo@peoplemaking.games
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #12

                      @iamlayer8 @tante "Google AI Overview is for Entertainment Purposes Only" just like ... was it copilot that had this in the terms of use or whatever?

                      iamlayer8@mastodon.socialI 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • timotimo@peoplemaking.gamesT timotimo@peoplemaking.games

                        @iamlayer8 @tante "Google AI Overview is for Entertainment Purposes Only" just like ... was it copilot that had this in the terms of use or whatever?

                        iamlayer8@mastodon.socialI This user is from outside of this forum
                        iamlayer8@mastodon.socialI This user is from outside of this forum
                        iamlayer8@mastodon.social
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #13

                        @timotimo
                        It should be flagged as AI Slop - on screen, mandated by law.
                        Then they can re-define what that means by delivering correct information. And in 5 years we will use #AISlop as an indicator of high quality content.

                        @tante

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • tante@tldr.nettime.orgT tante@tldr.nettime.org

                          A court in Munich declared that Google is liable for their "AI summaries" and all its hallucinations. This is an important step to bring "AI" slop in line with all other products on the market: "AI" products are basically the only ones where a provider can just deliver unchecked garbage and put all the liability on the consumer. I hope to see aggressive change here.

                          https://the-decoder.com/landmark-german-ruling-declares-googles-ai-overviews-are-googles-own-words-and-makes-it-liable-for-false-answers/

                          david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
                          david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
                          david_chisnall@infosec.exchange
                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                          #14

                          @tante

                          Google's defence needs to be amplified by anyone talking to politicians about 'AI' regulation:

                          Google is explicitly saying in their legal filing that the outputs from their LLM should not be trusted and that users should know that.

                          That's one hell of an admission. Imagine saying that about any other category of product.

                          lobingera@chaos.socialL c0dec0dec0de@hachyderm.ioC ozzelot@mstdn.socialO rdp@notpickard.comR mizkirsten@mastodon.socialM 20 Replies Last reply
                          1
                          0
                          • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

                            @tante

                            Google's defence needs to be amplified by anyone talking to politicians about 'AI' regulation:

                            Google is explicitly saying in their legal filing that the outputs from their LLM should not be trusted and that users should know that.

                            That's one hell of an admission. Imagine saying that about any other category of product.

                            lobingera@chaos.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
                            lobingera@chaos.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
                            lobingera@chaos.social
                            wrote sidst redigeret af
                            #15

                            @david_chisnall @tante

                            iirc, Google said that earlier about their search results, also.

                            markotway@mastodonapp.ukM 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • mjack@mastodon.bsd.cafeM mjack@mastodon.bsd.cafe shared this topic
                            • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

                              @tante

                              Google's defence needs to be amplified by anyone talking to politicians about 'AI' regulation:

                              Google is explicitly saying in their legal filing that the outputs from their LLM should not be trusted and that users should know that.

                              That's one hell of an admission. Imagine saying that about any other category of product.

                              c0dec0dec0de@hachyderm.ioC This user is from outside of this forum
                              c0dec0dec0de@hachyderm.ioC This user is from outside of this forum
                              c0dec0dec0de@hachyderm.io
                              wrote sidst redigeret af
                              #16

                              @david_chisnall @tante this is also known as the Fox “News” defense for those in the US

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

                                @tante

                                Google's defence needs to be amplified by anyone talking to politicians about 'AI' regulation:

                                Google is explicitly saying in their legal filing that the outputs from their LLM should not be trusted and that users should know that.

                                That's one hell of an admission. Imagine saying that about any other category of product.

                                ozzelot@mstdn.socialO This user is from outside of this forum
                                ozzelot@mstdn.socialO This user is from outside of this forum
                                ozzelot@mstdn.social
                                wrote sidst redigeret af
                                #17

                                @david_chisnall
                                Imagine TI saying that about their calculators.
                                @tante

                                iamlayer8@mastodon.socialI 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

                                  @tante

                                  Google's defence needs to be amplified by anyone talking to politicians about 'AI' regulation:

                                  Google is explicitly saying in their legal filing that the outputs from their LLM should not be trusted and that users should know that.

                                  That's one hell of an admission. Imagine saying that about any other category of product.

                                  rdp@notpickard.comR This user is from outside of this forum
                                  rdp@notpickard.comR This user is from outside of this forum
                                  rdp@notpickard.com
                                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                                  #18

                                  @david_chisnall @tante cigarettes?

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • lobingera@chaos.socialL lobingera@chaos.social

                                    @david_chisnall @tante

                                    iirc, Google said that earlier about their search results, also.

                                    markotway@mastodonapp.ukM This user is from outside of this forum
                                    markotway@mastodonapp.ukM This user is from outside of this forum
                                    markotway@mastodonapp.uk
                                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                                    #19

                                    @lobingera
                                    Slightly different. "search results you see may not be the most relevant for your query" is very different to "We're providing actual information which has a reasonably likelihood of being wrong, and potentially dangerously wrong".
                                    @david_chisnall @tante

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

                                      @tante

                                      Google's defence needs to be amplified by anyone talking to politicians about 'AI' regulation:

                                      Google is explicitly saying in their legal filing that the outputs from their LLM should not be trusted and that users should know that.

                                      That's one hell of an admission. Imagine saying that about any other category of product.

                                      mizkirsten@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                      mizkirsten@mastodon.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                      mizkirsten@mastodon.social
                                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                                      #20

                                      @david_chisnall @tante

                                      What's the difference between an LLM and a pack of cigarettes?

                                      They both fill the room with smoke that will eventually kill someone. But cigarettes come with a warning.

                                      iamlayer8@mastodon.socialI 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

                                        @tante

                                        Google's defence needs to be amplified by anyone talking to politicians about 'AI' regulation:

                                        Google is explicitly saying in their legal filing that the outputs from their LLM should not be trusted and that users should know that.

                                        That's one hell of an admission. Imagine saying that about any other category of product.

                                        robotistry@fediscience.orgR This user is from outside of this forum
                                        robotistry@fediscience.orgR This user is from outside of this forum
                                        robotistry@fediscience.org
                                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                                        #21

                                        @david_chisnall @tante Remember when Intel released a chip with a built in floating point math error that happened one nine-billionth of the time?

                                        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_FDIV_bug

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

                                          @tante

                                          Google's defence needs to be amplified by anyone talking to politicians about 'AI' regulation:

                                          Google is explicitly saying in their legal filing that the outputs from their LLM should not be trusted and that users should know that.

                                          That's one hell of an admission. Imagine saying that about any other category of product.

                                          jernej__s@infosec.exchangeJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                          jernej__s@infosec.exchangeJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                          jernej__s@infosec.exchange
                                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                                          #22

                                          @david_chisnall @tante Don't forget that Copilot is for entertainment purposes only, too.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Svar
                                          • Svar som emne
                                          Login for at svare
                                          • Ældste til nyeste
                                          • Nyeste til ældste
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Log ind

                                          • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          Graciously hosted by data.coop
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Hjem
                                          • Seneste
                                          • Etiketter
                                          • Populære
                                          • Verden
                                          • Bruger
                                          • Grupper