Some digital matters concern the state and others are private and there should be no sovereignty of the state over private matters.
German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews
21–30 of 587 posts
Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews
#22> In this case, Google's AI had wrongly linked two publishers to scams and shady business practices. Guess that's the end of their AI overviews in the EU!
that would be hela curryketchup nice
Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews
#23I have a business where our support email is recommended when people are searching for how to cancel a completely unrelated scam subscription that is showing up on their bank or credit card charges. We get emails almost daily from confused people.
Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews
#24I'm surprised this is even a thing. After all, you go to Google not for the truth, but to search Google. Since when is truthiness the "guarantee of service"? You're not even paying for a google service, search is free... You might be the product, and your data, but you didn't directly pay for a service and they didn't sell you a fake service. I'm not taking Google's side, this isn't about whether it's right or wrong…
I think it's very clear that Google's AI overviews go far beyond just searching Google because they often incorrectly compile sources to come up with an incorrect answer. For example of this look at the comment I made in this thread
Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is exactly the point of the ruling, though... they are saying that AI summaries are NOT the same as search. If Google was just returning search results, and then users clicked on a website and read the content there, Google is not responsible for the content. If instead Google gives you an answer right there on google.com, without going to another site, they ARE responsible for it. That makes sense to me?
why? tons of websites push misinformation intentionally. is there a truth requirement anywhere? i don’t get why this is a thing at all
What don’t you understand? Those websites that defame a company are liable for that defamation. In this case Google defamed a company in its AI summary and is this liable for that defamation.
Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews
#26Companies generally are liable if their product doesn’t perform. No reason AI should be any different.
Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews
#27Good. The true mark of AGI is when a company accepts liability and doesn’t bury “for entertainment purposes only” deep in their TOS. Same as it works with employees. Same for self-driving. Your car is not self-driving until it accepts liability and you count as just a passenger. But watch as Germany soon loses AI Google results.
[deleted]
Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews
#28Some digital matters concern the state and others are private and there should be no sovereignty of the state over private matters.
Who will adjudicate private disputes between citizens if not the state?
Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews
#29Does this extend to ads displayed in search results? Because they absolutely should be liable for the scams they advertise also.
Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is exactly the point of the ruling, though... they are saying that AI summaries are NOT the same as search. If Google was just returning search results, and then users clicked on a website and read the content there, Google is not responsible for the content. If instead Google gives you an answer right there on google.com, without going to another site, they ARE responsible for it. That makes sense to me?
why? tons of websites push misinformation intentionally. is there a truth requirement anywhere? i don’t get why this is a thing at all
> is there a truth requirement anywhere?
Yes, and it's called defamation when you don't follow it.