Decidedly yours

Jeeves’ musings regarding his employer.

A short comic, that came from how often Bertie is used and made a fool of in the books and series; of course this is a big comical pillar of J&W, but I started to think of how much it could weight on Bertie, and, after years of service and the deepening of their bond, on Jeeves. Hopefully the writing is decent enough, and I am sure I am not the first to explore such an idea. I will transcribe the text for easier viewing:

“A great number of words has been written on the subject of my employer, Mr. Wooster, and his various misadventures.

Many a gentleman or lady come knocking at our door, calling for my employer's aid...

Whether that be in the form of a favour…

…or, more simply, money.

Mr. Wooster has, for this reason, been described in many accounts (and very often by himself) as foolish, naive, and lacking spine.

On one occasion, I myself must admit to having referred to him as “mentally negligible". This declaration, in truth, revealed much more of my character than that of Mr. Wooster.

For the truth is that Mr. Wooster happens to be kind, instead of brilliantly cutting; good natured, instead of respectably distant; and caring, instead of decorously cold.

No, he’s not a fool at all.

These may not be the traits of the proper gentleman; but they are those of a good man, one I am proud to stand beside.

"Let us pray that God will grant us a pope who doubts"

. .

am i sitting in a tin can

Ivy Mermaid 🍃˖°𓇼🌊⋆🐚

1. The court holds Google responsible for statements made by its AI, considering them Google's statements (search engines have limited liability for results in their engine as they're the words of other sites/companies/people), meaning when their AI lies/hallucinates they're liable for the defamation/harm resulting from those statements.

2. Google's defense that customers are generally aware of the lack of reliability and are responsible for fact checking was dismissed. As the court pointed out, that would "significantly diminish" AI Search's stated purpose and it can't be distinguished from Google's business practices/statements as a search tool.

3. Studies have found about 91% of Google's everyday AI responses are accurate, leaving millions of searches per HOUR with potential liability for falsehoods. 56% of correct responses weren't supported by the sources the AI listed. Both of which mean Google is now liable for a LOT more AI "errors."

4. Google was held liable for 80% of court costs in this case and this precedent is expected to reverberate around the world. This is a massive shift from the 3rd-party search provider role Google has previously played and it comes right as they've tied ALL searches to their AI search.

For all the reasons above AND ALSO because this particular lawsuit is a defamation case

Privacy lawsuits are hard because most privacy laws are super super weak, and there's very rarely a lot of money or enforcement backing privacy laws for...twenty million reasons, really...

But defamation suits? Those have teeth.

(In large part because, at least in some countries and including in the US, defamation laws protect public figures the least - and "public figures" legally includes most if not all politicians, and a hell of a lot of other rich ppl too)

A German court has ruled that Google can be held directly liable for false claims made by its AI Overviews, a decision that could put a serious legal dent in the whole “the AI made me do it” defense. According to The Next Web, the Regional Court of Munich issued a temporary injunction after Google’s AI Overviews wrongly tied two Munich publishers to scams, subscription traps, and dubious business practices. The court treated those AI-generated summaries as Google’s own statements, not just ordinary search results pointing to third-party pages. That distinction matters. Search engines have traditionally had more protection because they index and link to other people’s content. AI Overviews changes the machinery. Google is not just showing the web anymore. It is summarizing it, rewriting it, and sometimes apparently hallucinating a tiny legal grenade into the results page.