AI generated quotes in a story about AI clanker writing a blog post about a human developer because they didn’t accept their code contributions.
How deep can someone go here.
AI generated quotes in a story about AI clanker writing a blog post about a human developer because they didn’t accept their code contributions.
How deep can someone go here.
It would be nice if he decides to sue ars technica for that. Writers and publisher need to learn the hard way that you can’t use ai and trust that for publishing stuff that needs factual coherence. If not by ethics, let it be from fear of lawsuits.
Sue them for what? He would have to prove damages and they took it down.
Libel. Taking it down doesn’t undo the damage to reputation which libel is concerned with. They might not get any monetary damages awarded but could maybe force Ars to put out a retraction.
As much as I would like to see that happen paying to fight a court case against Conde Nast just to get a retraction that they will stick somewhere invisible doesn’t really sound like a winning formula.
Letting them win because you’ve conceded before even playing is also a losing formula. Even if they don’t get awarded monetary damages they can probably at least get their legal expenses covered.
They pulled the article. What more are you hoping for?
To what end?
How about getting them to put an “e” after the “s” in their name instead?
In the US, libel requires you to prove that the writer knew that what they were writing is not true and that they did it to hurt you. Doing lazy research and trusting an AI is not going to meet that standard.
They put out a retraction: https://arstechnica.com/staff/2026/02/editors-note-retraction-of-article-containing-fabricated-quotations/
Publicly making false statements using his name isn’t a crime by itself in his jurisdiction?
No, there are a bunch of things required to be met in the US for libel and a bunch of precedent which is why it’s hard to sue for it and succeed
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law