A Bit of Randomness I Like

2) any vegetable is better than no vegetable

it would be so awesome

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.

Oh, yeah, let's compare overly elaborate skincare routines that women choose for themselves (albeit under the influence of advertising that, in aggregate, has a very negative effect on perception of women and their bodies) and pay for with their own money with the fucking tradwives who actively promote submitting yourself to a sexist man. Surely spending way too much on skincare is the same thing as devoting your entire life to an extremely unequal relationship and actively eshewing all forms of independence, financial, social or emotional.

We owe so many apologies to choice feminism holy fuck

These skincare routines, the ones that the OP is referencing specifically, the ones that are eight steps a session and want you to use red light therapy and dermal fillers and microneedling - why are you doing this for yourself? Okay, it makes you feel good. Why? Is it that you are taking the time to care for yourself because you’re lacking care in another are of your life? It’s anti-aging; okay. Are you using anti aging products for a health reason, because you have a family history of skin issues, or because you fear aging? If you fear aging, then why do you fear it? If it’s for your self-image, why are you comparing yourself to others?

Yeah, it’s a lot, asking why why why why like a toddler. It’s soooooo much easier to sit back and not be critical and just go “it makes me feel good” and let someone else do the thinking for you.

And that’s the pipeline, right there; if you outsource your critical thinking skills, you outsource your agency.

This is a form of backdoor bigotry from both normative facts (there are more straight than gay relationships) and well represented bigoted beliefs (men are superior to women).