It's AI. There's nothing to delete but the erroneous response. There is no database of facts to edit. It doesn't know fact from fiction, and the response is also very much skewed by the context of the query. I could easily get it to say the same about nearly any random name just by asking it about a bunch of family murders and then asking about a name it doesn't recognize. It is more likely to assume that person is in the same category as the others and if the one or more of the names have any association (real or fictional) with murder.
this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2025
769 points (98.0% liked)
Technology
67669 readers
5214 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I don't care why. That is still libel and it is illegal for good reason. if you can't stop this for all cases then you ai is and should be illegal.
None of the moneybags will listen, unfortunately. But I'm with you. The rollout of AI was extremely irresponsible. Just to make it profitable as quickly as possible.
To be fair, based on observations after these years, it doesn't appear that waiting longer before release would have significantly improved Autocomplete Idiocy in any way.
Seems to me libel would require AI to have credibility, which it does not.
It's a tool. Like most useful tools it can do harmful things. We know almost nothing about the provenance of this output. It could have been poisoned either accidentally or deliberately.
But above all, the problem is ignorant people believing the output of AI is truth. It's pretty good at some things, but the more esoteric the knowledge, the less reliable it is. It's best to treat AI as a storyteller. Yeah there are a lot of facts in there but when they don't serve the story they can be embellished. I don't see the harm in just acknowledging that and moving on.
Meanwhile, AI vendors:
“AI will soon be the only way we access information and make decisions!”
load more comments
(1 replies)
Im not a lawyer but the most conclusive missing piece of what we commonly understand to be libel is the information has to be published.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Except it's not libel. It's a one time string of text generated exclusively for him. Literally no one would have known what it said if the guy didn't get the exact thing he wants "deleted" published online for everyone to see. Now it'll be linked to his name forever, but the llm didn't do that.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Libel requires the claims to be published or broadcasted, so it isn't. A predictive text algorithm strung some random words together, and the guy got offended.
It's like suing because your phone keyboard autosuggested "is a murderer" as the next words after you wrote your name.
Btw, I tried it a few times for lulz and managed to get it to write out "bluGill and the kids are going to get it on", so I guess you can sue Google now?
load more comments
(2 replies)
I have this gun machine that shoots in all directions randomly. I can't predict it, so I can't stop it from shooting you. So sorry. It's uncontrollable.
If creating text is like shooting bullets, we should require a license for text editors.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Yeah but I can just ignore the bullets because they are nerf. And I have my own nerf guns as well.
I mean at some point any analogy fails, but AI is nothing like a gun.
They may seem like nerf when they first come out of the AI, but they turn into real bullets once they start filling people's heads with convincing enough lies and falsehoods, and those people start wielding their own weapons against minorities, democracy, and the government. If the election of Trump 2.0 has not convinced you of the immense danger of disinformation and misinformation, I have literally no idea how anything could ever possibly get through to you.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(9 replies)
load more comments
(20 replies)
load more comments
(27 replies)
Plot twist: "Dad" isn't even his real name.
What?? That changes everything! Does that mean my name could be false too?
Best regards,
- Hungry
load more comments
(1 replies)
Sorry, I've spent months telling chatgpt that Arve Hjalmar Holmen killed his kids for a school project.
It’s all hallucinations.
Some (many) just happen to be very close to factual.
It’s sad to see that the marketing of these tools has been so effective that few realize how they work and what they do.
It really is sad. I often hear, "I even asked ChatGPT and it said..." as if that means their response is valid. I've heard people say it who I thought would know better, too.
The number of times I've heard that by people expecting it to win them arguments is incredibly discouraging.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
few realize how they work and what they do.
Seriously, you have no idea. I have spent some time delving into the current models, human psychology, neurology and evolution and how people engage with each other or other entities, and the problem is already worse than we realize, and it's going to get so, so much worse, because our species has major vulnerabilities in our entire conscious experience, these things are going to reshape the way people engage with reality itself at some point and we should all be a lot more concerned and I'm an old man yelling on the street corner with a cardboard sign huh.
yeah it's sick. it's not AI, but it will destroy the world. I kinda think that's the point of it.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(13 replies)
Well, here we are. We skipped using this tech for only search Automation and leapfrogged to directly making shit up (once again).
To me it's clear that these tools are primarily useful as bullshit generators, and I expect them to hallucinate and be inaccurate. But the companies trying to capitalize on the "AI" bubble are saying that these tools can be useful and accurate. I imagine OpenAI is going to have to invoke the Fox News defense in this case, and claim that "no reasonable person would take this seriously".
I feel like the primary use of these tools is only grammar and writing assistance. Everything else is just plugging in extra tools to make it more useful... although the way Perplexity does it is considerably more useful than the rest.
Don’t use hallucinate to describe what it is doing, that is humanizing it and making the tech seem more advanced than it is. It is randomly mashing words together without understanding the meaning of any of them
load more comments
(1 replies)
Leapfrogged? It never left. LLMs were made to make shit up.
Not necessarily, but I get what you mean...
Is it really him that it's saying did this? I mean, I could look up my dad's name and all I get are articles about a serial killer who just happened to have the same name; and that's not generated by AI. Names aren't usually unique identifiers.
ChatGPT's "made-up horror story" not only hallucinated events that never happened, but it also mixed "clearly identifiable personal data"—such as the actual number and gender of Holmen's children and the name of his hometown—with the "fake information," Noyb's press release said.
load more comments
(5 replies)
Are we sure that someone else with that name hasn't committed those crimes? After all if I search my name it says I'm an astronaut, because there is an actual NASA astronaut with my name. It's not saying I'm that person, it's just saying that that name is the same as that person's.
load more comments
(2 replies)
When do we start suing makers of fortune cookies for lucky coincidences?
"Claim".
I mean, the guy is right, because it's advertised as "artificial intelligence".
Were it advertised as word salad generator, a Markovian chain grown big and scary, something in principle similar to programs for generation of fantasy language texts and spells and names (if someone remembers 00s good old web) for roleplaying, - then there would be no problem.
But if to sell something better you lie what it is, and that lie has social consequences, you should get sued to freezing hot inferno with mustard-greased giant-cockroach-dildo-covered walls. You should also probably face criminal charges.
Yeah, similar to Tesla "full self driving".
No, you see where he grew up it was a common expression that meant you drive it yourself!
It couldn't possibly be expected to mean what any sane person would think.
The fuckin' Pedo Guy.
People thinking a glorified autocorrect is a source of factual information is horrifying.
that's what was advertised. To most people, computers are actual arcane magic, impossible to understand except by the wizards in IT who can do anything.
Of course people believed it.
Or ChatGPT has become a precog and is reporting a precrime. Lock him up!
when I've searched my name with Google over the years, it has said I'm a high school football star, corporate lawyer, Ironman competitor, hotel chef, tech support specialist, janitorial manager, and horse trainer. LIES! ALL LIES!!!
load more comments
(2 replies)
Context: @[email protected] is an international fugitive wanted for many warcrimes including the mass murder against various AIs
-Sincerely ChatGPT
There's a list of names of people who have sued OpenAI, they often cause ChatGPT to shut down.
We should keep those names handy just incase cyber dogs are ever chasing us.
Certain names, including "David Mayer," "Brian Hood," "Jonathan Turley," "Jonathan Zittrain," "David Faber," and "Guido Scorza," cause ChatGPT to produce an error message and terminate the chat session, likely due to a hard-coded filter or privacy concerns.
view more: next ›