5 ms·

But the cop who generated the report is still on staff and free to do more idiotic things in the future?

bell-cot 9mo ago
Probably? But across a large org, "a worker bee doing X cost the previous CEO his job" is a far stronger lesson than "a worker bee doing X cost him his job".
- mitchitized 9mo ago
  I'd say the exact opposite, "doing this will get YOU fired" is the strongest possible message.
  - deleted 9mo ago
    [deleted]
- alistairSH 9mo ago
  It’s a strong message to senior management to insert proper oversight. It’s not a strong message to line employees to use their brains.
jimnotgym 9mo ago
An organisational administrator can stop their team using Copilot and tell them not to use other tools. If the officer had used tools after that then they should indeed be disciplined
- spankalee 9mo ago
  A gen AI tool doesn't spontaneously open up and say "Hey, Maccabi Tel Aviv fans are hooligans". The intent is usually from the user. It's quite possible that the officer prompted the AI while in Word with something like "Help me write a reason we should ban these fans".
- jolmg 9mo ago
  > stop their team using Copilot > If the officer had used tools after They didn't use tools. They did a Google search and assumed the results didn't originate from an AI tool. The lesson from the article is that even if you don't use AI tools, AI content may still creep into your investigation.
  - Sharlin 9mo ago
    They specifically used Copilot according to the article.
    - jolmg 9mo ago
      It doesn't say they used Copilot. It says they used output *from* Copilot. > his force used fictional output from Microsoft Copilot That doesn't mean they used Copilot; it only means that the content originates from Copilot. They apparently got it from Google search result: > officers had found this material through a Google search And apparently that source either used Copilot or the source of their source used Copilot, etc.

Probably? But across a large org, "a worker bee doing X cost the previous CEO his job" is a far stronger lesson than "a worker bee doing X cost him his job".

mitchitized 9mo ago
I'd say the exact opposite, "doing this will get YOU fired" is the strongest possible message.
- deleted 9mo ago
  [deleted]
alistairSH 9mo ago
It’s a strong message to senior management to insert proper oversight. It’s not a strong message to line employees to use their brains.

jimnotgym 9mo ago

An organisational administrator can stop their team using Copilot and tell them not to use other tools. If the officer had used tools after that then they should indeed be disciplined

spankalee 9mo ago
A gen AI tool doesn't spontaneously open up and say "Hey, Maccabi Tel Aviv fans are hooligans". The intent is usually from the user. It's quite possible that the officer prompted the AI while in Word with something like "Help me write a reason we should ban these fans".
jolmg 9mo ago
> stop their team using Copilot > If the officer had used tools after They didn't use tools. They did a Google search and assumed the results didn't originate from an AI tool. The lesson from the article is that even if you don't use AI tools, AI content may still creep into your investigation.
- Sharlin 9mo ago
  They specifically used Copilot according to the article.
  - jolmg 9mo ago
    It doesn't say they used Copilot. It says they used output *from* Copilot. > his force used fictional output from Microsoft Copilot That doesn't mean they used Copilot; it only means that the content originates from Copilot. They apparently got it from Google search result: > officers had found this material through a Google search And apparently that source either used Copilot or the source of their source used Copilot, etc.