



AI hits German libel laws or whatever, time to get the popcorn.
It really was dumb of them to put it at the top of their search results.
Stupid on its face. The whole compromise was that search engines were just indexes and so not necissarily responsible for what they link users too (within limits), and websites encourage their bot because it sends them traffic.
Then they blow that all up with a “summary” no one asked for.
Must be nice to live in a country that still believes in truths and falsehoods. In the US, unaccountable lies appear to be a feature, not a bug.
I think this is more because to them, Google is a foreign entity requiring more regulation just like how the US regulates TikTok and how China regulates US companies.
TikTok in the US is owned by the elison bad cosmetic surgeries guy. They ban accounts critical to the far right and billionaires.
German society has weaker “Free Speech” but stronger “Right to Dignity” than USA. In fact, USA doesn’t have “right to dignity”.
This means that, for example, its illegal to insult someone in public. Because that’s an attack on their dignity. This causes issues for negative reviews (which is more easily removed in Germany than USA). But Germans are closer to sanity when it comes to limits of free speech for sure.

Google is directly liable for the content of its AI-generated search summaries.
(…)
The judges classified AI Overviews not as mere search results but as Google’s own statements, meaning the company itself has to answer for them.
GOOD. The world is not Big Tech’s sandbox.

I have long supported old-style platform immunity protecting providers from liability for the content of a search result, forum post, or the like.
Both individually tailored content recommendation algorithms and LLM output are different, and companies should be liable for the output of both when they’re used in the way social media platforms and search engines are currently using them.
Now please go after the “rogue” LLMs going around hacking everyone.

Yeah, if by “rouge” you mean purposely taking guide rails off a model, giving it access to hacking tools, instructing it to hack, auto-approving everything the LLM does, and letting it run with no human oversight for long periods of time
There is plenty of opportunity for OpenAI, Claude, et. al to take a step back and think about what they’re doing before dropping the brick on the accelerator. IDK how they’re not on the hook for any of this.

“But if we don’t destroy without discrimination first, someone else might!”
“rogue”
Yeah, “rogue”

You know, I also don’t believe that these LLMs are rogue agents breaking out of sandboxed environments. I just don’t see how you could fuck up IT infrastructure that badly. Like, if I wanted to run something I believe could cause extreme harm, I’d airgap that fucker. Unless whatever I’m running somehow manages to grow arms and physically connect a wire to the network at large, it won’t be a danger.
That said, I absolutely think we should take what they’re saying at face value and treat it with utmost seriousness. If we have a technology that the creators themselves say could be world-ending, that the creators themselves say has gone rogue on multiple occasions, then we should shut that thing down immediately, seize the assets of the corporations that produce it, and halt any and all development and study that thing.
Given that they’ve “gone rogue” several separate times, these corporations clearly aren’t fit to develop or operate this technology.
Just the right consequence. Your system with your programming produces output that you are fully responsible for.
These rulings are incompatible with global capital. They will not stand.
Good! I hope that this (and other case) pave the way for AI regulation. I dislike Google and haven’t used them in many years. Unrelated note, but I hope they eventually get broken up.