Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

the-decoder.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 587 posts

Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

#311

Post by 9dev »

gblargg wrote: post #167
sham1 wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If our standard for laws would be that "well no reasonable person would do this/believe this" then nothing would be illegal, there'd be no need to label any product as potentiality harmful, etc. Do you really want to go there? That everything in the world would have a literal "caveat emptor" attached to it?

I thought Google labeled its AI summary with a disclaimer already. I don't want companies to be forced to only offer safe-for-children services.

It's unbelievable how lightly some people hand over the tools for mass manipulation to a single corporation in the name of freedom of all things. We're not talking about a laser pointer here.

Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

#312

Post by UltraSane »

The original Google search that used inverted indexes and page rank and respected boolean operators was very good and let you actually find obscure information. Call this Google Search 1.0

Then in order to increase revenue Google dumbed down search very badly and made it very hard to find obscure information. Whoever decided to delete random search terms is someone I want to punch in the face really hard. Call this Google Search 2.0

But the way Google has integrated Gemini Flash into search is actually pretty good and is definitely an improvement over Google Search 2.0

Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

#313

Post by 9dev »

TZubiri wrote: post #230
Frieren wrote: post #81

How could anything else make any sense? Platforms are getting used to provide dangerous broken products and get away with it. There should be some limit to it. Next do Amazon that is selling AI generated foraging books: - https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/sep/01/mushroom-... When I was a kid it was possible to buy any foraging books from a store and they had a minimum quality. Is that so difficult to achiev…

>How could anything else make any sense? Well, they disclaimed and the user acknowledged Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-QaEB5eXSU Minute 3:00

Luckily it doesn't work like this in the EU.

Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

#314

Post by ben_w »

throwaway27448 wrote: post #48
Swizec wrote: post #18

Good. 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.

> The true mark of AGI Can we just trash this as a marketing term? If/when AGI arrives there will be no point quibbling over competency. What we are looking at is just bad search results

"No quibble" is more a mark of ASI than AGI; while both are easily coopted as marketing terms[0], "smarter than all humans" is harder to dispute than "general intelligence" (can do some graduate level work, can't drive well enough to render steering wheels obsolete, is it general?)

[0] e.g. Zuckerberg: https://www.meta.com/superintelligence/

Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

#315

Post by z3t4 »

kevinxsun wrote: post #271

We are actually a victim too, in the same situation as these two publishers. Google's AI makes up false accusations in search result AI overview about our business. We have sent countless feedback to Google in the past 4 months, contacted their legal team 3 times, all got ignored. Google's AI just pukes untrue, misinformation about us, every time the page is refreshed, AI just makes up new accusations and false infor…

And people even here on HN actually thinks that AI/LLM are factually correct... The more cases like this the easier it will get to sue them (IANAL)

Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

#317

Post by 9dev »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #155
oaiey wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it is shown to millions, everyone who is interested in you, they are factually not fact checking and you can do nothing against it. It can destroy you. You are analyzing this on the assumption that people are rational and have capacity to do the check. They have neither.

(Shrug) That sounds like their problem, if they reflexively believe everything Google's AI tells them. No one I respect, care for, or work with would believe such a thing without additional justification. Anyone who does accept Google's AI output blindly will soon find that their mistaken opinion of CamperBob2 is the least of their problems. There is a reason Google goes (well) out of their way to warn people that th…

Are you really that ignorant of the past? There are so many cases of people suffering from wrong accusations. They get death threats. People harass them on the street. Throw stones into their windows. Beat up their kids. Trash their car. Deny them jobs, or leases, kick them out of their apartment.

You have no idea what it can mean to end up in such a situation.

Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

#318

Post by ben_w »

TonyTrapp wrote: post #248
ben_w wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm half-remembering a now-old satire along the same lines has Germans wondering why having Google Street View work in their area also requires internal photos of their apartments.

This one? :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMFBuHsKXb0

Genau :)

Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

#319

Post by 9dev »

NegativeK wrote: post #124
clear-octopus wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not very typical in software. Especially software you don’t pay for (with money)

That's apparently already changing in the EU, where software vulnerabilities mean the company is liable for damages. The only way out is to straight up not make any money (not just from direct sales) from the software.

That is a misrepresentation. You are obligated to actually put effort into securing your products, which is the only sensible stance to take.

Re: German ruling declares Google liable for false answers in AI Overviews

#320

Post by pembrook »

sham1 wrote: post #308
pembrook wrote: post #257

My feelings about this rest of the scope of liability. From my understanding, Google is now liable if making false claims about a personal/business reputation. I like this idea in theory (key word). However, I can easily see the slippery slope where in practice this means providing any AI response becomes too risky, and it becomes another money club used to extract wealth from big tech due to the current hysterical a…

The slippery slope of being held liable for an AI overview leading to neo-Hitler is certainly a take, and a ridiculous one at that. It's one thing for an LLM to get things wrong. This case is not that though. And if big tech can't make sure that their models don't libel companies and individuals then good riddance. Whatever diminutive economic advantage one can get from "competitive LLMs" probably isn't worth it anyw…

You've formed a strawman out of my argument.

My point is Germany further rejecting participation in the the next wave of technology (as they have done for 50 years) is going to NOT improve the trajectory they are currently on...which is bad.

The neo-Hitler and re-militarization thing is already happening. AfD leads in the polls, they're opening talking about remigration of immigrants, Germany now produces more ammunition than any country on earth. AI has nothing to do with it.

And, given I'm speaking to one of the the anti-civilization/anti-tech doomers of HN as predicted, do you think Germany rejecting technology again is going to improve the "climate crisis" or hurt it? How is the de-commissioning of Nuclear working out there?

Post reply on HN