[dead]
German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews
571–580 of 587 posts
Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews
#572Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews
#573Earlier quoted context omitted.
You 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.
The 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?
...and users have 100% the choice not to use Google.
Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews
#574Earlier quoted context omitted.
When reading a review, it should always be assumed that it is based off of one "visit". A negative review will probably never have more than a few visits and if they do they'd normally say "I used to come here a lot but after new ownership service sucks!"
We're talking about a country where someone had their house raided and their devices stolen by the police for tweeting "Du bist so 1 Pimmel" (you are such a dick) to a politician.
Well, it is an insult and the insulted always, before the internet and now, has the right to sue for it. Only because it happened on the internet doesn't change the law.
Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews
#575Earlier quoted context omitted.
This was later deemed inappropriate by courts. Shit happens -- as long as the corrective mechanisms work it is just exceptions.
I'm not super convinced that we can call something like that as "shit happens." in the US "shit" like this happens where cops wrongly raid someone's house and someone often dies because of of this. Though, I think it may be an example of corrective mechanisms not working, but this shouldn't have even happened once.
In Germany, police killing innocent people in house raids is a very rare occurrence, I can't remember a case but of course it's possible that it happened.
So maybe Americans should worry about their own business and not tell a country with a much longer history what is best for them?
Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews
#576Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not like the raids in the US because there are less guns around. So risk of someone dying because of a house search are pretty low (supported by police death numbers). This would be more about privacy violations and unnecessary chicanery.
> It's not like the raids in the US because there are less guns around. As an European, this attitude is absolutely fucking shocking. Police force their way into my home without excellent cause to do so? I'd want someone executed . It would be unforgivable. It has nothing to do with the guns, but with the absolutely gross violation of the most basic rights codified by the ECHR. >This would be more about privacy viola…
It would benefit you to read the applicable laws, keyword "Beleidigung".
Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews
#577Earlier quoted context omitted.
This was later deemed inappropriate by courts. Shit happens -- as long as the corrective mechanisms work it is just exceptions.
Why is it even allowed to raid someone for victimless crimes? It's a fundamental issue, not just a mistake.
Victimless when there was a clear target for the insult? Interesting, but wrong take.
Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews
#578Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, Google just removes them as a first step because this is the least amount of work for them. Theoretically there is an Google appeals process. After that it needs to go to court. My guess is that often reviews are generalizing (easy mistake to make). E.g. they say "service is slow", when they should say: "When I was there on Thursday at noon service was slow for my table".
When reading a review, it should always be assumed that it is based off of one "visit". A negative review will probably never have more than a few visits and if they do they'd normally say "I used to come here a lot but after new ownership service sucks!"
"it should always be assumed"...wow good luck with your life.
Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews
#579Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course, Google spends engineering/legal hours to make country-specific changes relative to problems that do not exist.
Save your breath. CarlitosHighway's posts on this thread shows he's just blindly running defense for Germany's status quo on defamation laws low threshold for abuse on every argument someone brings, not being open to arguing in good faith, weightings in on the pros and cons of this, so it doesn't matter what counterexamples you keep bringing to him, it won't change his mind, his replies will be more "anecdotal" snark…
There's no point in weighing the pros and cons of laws, if people want to change them, they need to pursue the official lane to do so. Arguing on this American "Brainiac MAGA" forum will not help them in their goals to make Germany more like the US.