• THB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    This appears to be impossible with current LLMs. You would need an actual human to verify every possible search result as the LLM is incapable of doing that for itself

    • Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      appears to be impossible with current LLMs

      Not the court’s problem.

      “Sorry, your honor, my weapon is that faulty so I can never know who it is who will be killed, but I just had to shoot because that’s how I make my money…”

      • THB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        That’s my point, the problem is the LLM itself shouldn’t even be being used to begin with. I’m not defending AI bullshit by any means. But legislating “truth” out of an LLM is an impossible ask, l like asking for puppies to be shot out of a pistol.

        • Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Sometimes it does not even matter if it is truth or not.

          That may actually be such a case here: Factual statements that can create bad reputation for somebody (or some company).

          • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            That cannot be libel in most jurisdictions. I’m pretty sure that’s not the case here.

    • [deleted]@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Then LLMs are defective and should not be used as a replacement for web indexes or anything useful.