>>Now, under what circumstances is someone deemed the "publisher" when an AI emits a libel about someone? What if that leads to actual damages? (e.g. a no-hire

>>Now, under what circumstances is someone deemed the "publisher" when an AI emits a libel about someone? What if that leads to actual damages? (e.g. a no-hire decision based on automated libel)? Only novel point anyone (including the Author of the original point) is actually bringing up! So far, the bots just seem to be 1:1. If I DM'd my wife that "pjc50 is a raging alcoholic and hits kittens" that's not usually going to be deemed libel (in the US, where I reside and care about the legality of things) unless my wife then goes out and uses that to cause harm (published it on her blog and got you fired). As for now, Turley would have a HELL of a time proving actual harm unless he got the most sympathetic judge he could shop for, and is mostly just scaremongering the idea of "Liberal Censorship!!!!" which, don't get me wrong, I would also strongly oppose (fuck all censorship), but which isn't actually what is happening.