3 ms·
Should we hold scientists and journalists liable if they say false things or misrepresent things?
by Robotbeat 4mo ago
Should we hold scientists and journalists liable if they say false things or misrepresent things?
- novemp 4mo agoYes, obviously.
- Robotbeat 4mo agoWhat if they just make a mistake, unintentionally?
- 12_throw_away 4mo agoPublishing lies that were generated by the plausible-lie-generating-machine is a very intentional action, it's not a "mistake". The legal profession uses the term "reckless disregard", see, e.g., [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._Sullivan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._Sullivan
- Robotbeat 4mo agoIt’s illegal to make factual errors. Wow, cool, I guess we solved science very easily!
- 12_throw_away 4mo agoMight I suggest that X.com - "the everything app" - would be a better fit for your unique rhetorical style?
- themafia 4mo agoIf they do so knowingly, and harm is caused, then yes. Are you suggesting we should give them a pass from years of acquired jurisprudence simply because they hold a particular title? And what institution gives out the licenses for journalists and scientists? Is it revokable?
- Robotbeat 4mo agoDo LLMs knowingly make mistakes? Do we sue scientists for unintentional procedural errors?
- danaris 4mo agoThis isn't about what the LLM knows. No one's trying to hold a computer liable. This is about what Google knows. And Google knows perfectly well that LLMs hallucinate all the time. They will provide incorrect information, confidently and often. Which is why this whole article is explicitly about holding Google accountable.
- Robotbeat 4mo agoYou honestly think Google is intentionally giving wrong answers??? Google would love to have a perfect oracle that never makes mistakes! Maybe German courts can conjure one up.
- danaris 4mo agoThe choices are not between "perfect oracle that never makes mistakes" and "hallucinated AI overviews". Google 100% has the choice not to include AI overviews. Which they know are often false. It would mean egg on their face, to be sure, but would it even meaningfully impact revenue?
- Robotbeat 4mo ago...and users have 100% the choice not to use Google.
- FabCH 4mo agoWe already do. Libel and fraud are already illegal.
- atoav 4mo agoYou don't?
- Robotbeat 4mo agoIt’s in the nature of empirical reality that scientific measurements can be wrong.
- trumpdong 4mo agoThe danger there is that the government will demand access to a journalists sources. "Leak reports Area 51 has aliens!" "Oh yeah? Prove who told you that or we'll arrest you for lying" Or selectively. "Vaccines cause autism!" "Okay" "Vaccines don't cause autism!" "Prove it beyond a reasonable doubt or we'll arrest you for lying" If we can solve these problems, then yes?
- Robotbeat 4mo ago…even unintentionally.