this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2026
1270 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

85297 readers
3913 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org 53 points 1 day ago (1 children)

the AI makes its own claims that don't appear in any linked source, and the operator has to answer for them. [...] if it gains traction internationally, the fallout could hit not just Google but every AI provider

And that is a good thing!

We (the world) need at least some basic level of quality and truth in AI generated answers. FINALLY.

[–] THB@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago (5 children)

This appears to be impossible with current LLMs. You would need an actual human to verify every possible search result as the LLM is incapable of doing that for itself

[–] Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org 43 points 1 day ago (1 children)

appears to be impossible with current LLMs

Not the court's problem.

"Sorry, your honor, my weapon is that faulty so I can never know who it is who will be killed, but I just had to shoot because that's how I make my money..."

[–] THB@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

That's my point, the problem is the LLM itself shouldn't even be being used to begin with. I'm not defending AI bullshit by any means. I'm saying "truth" or "quality" are not qualities that an LLM will ever possess by its own nature. The ultimate solution for truth or quality is no LLMs, but I guess that ship has sailed.

[–] Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Sometimes it does not even matter if it is truth or not.

That may actually be such a case here: Factual statements that can create bad reputation for somebody (or some company).

[–] JcbAzPx@lemmy.world 0 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

That cannot be libel in most jurisdictions. I'm pretty sure that's not the case here.

[–] Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org 1 points 13 hours ago

Have you read the verdict?

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 19 points 22 hours ago

Then LLMs are defective and should not be used as a replacement for web indexes or anything useful.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 16 hours ago

Then I look forward to future LLMs.

[–] benjirenji@slrpnk.net 1 points 22 hours ago

You just need to be able to reduce the risk. They all operate like this. You can't have complete certainty, even pre-LLMs. If the answers are wrong in only 0.001% cases and gravely wrong in 0.00001% cases it may be worth the risk. You gotta be able to sue for damages after all.