← Back to context Comment by novemp 5 days ago Yes, obviously. 4 comments novemp Reply Robotbeat 5 days ago What if they just make a mistake, unintentionally? 12_throw_away 4 days ago Publishing lies that were generated by the plausible-lie-generating-machine is a very intentional action, it's not a "mistake".The legal profession uses the term "reckless disregard", see, e.g., [1].[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._Sullivan Robotbeat 4 days ago It’s illegal to make factual errors. Wow, cool, I guess we solved science very easily! 1 reply →
Robotbeat 5 days ago What if they just make a mistake, unintentionally? 12_throw_away 4 days ago Publishing lies that were generated by the plausible-lie-generating-machine is a very intentional action, it's not a "mistake".The legal profession uses the term "reckless disregard", see, e.g., [1].[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._Sullivan Robotbeat 4 days ago It’s illegal to make factual errors. Wow, cool, I guess we solved science very easily! 1 reply →
12_throw_away 4 days ago Publishing lies that were generated by the plausible-lie-generating-machine is a very intentional action, it's not a "mistake".The legal profession uses the term "reckless disregard", see, e.g., [1].[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._Sullivan Robotbeat 4 days ago It’s illegal to make factual errors. Wow, cool, I guess we solved science very easily! 1 reply →
Robotbeat 4 days ago It’s illegal to make factual errors. Wow, cool, I guess we solved science very easily! 1 reply →
What if they just make a mistake, unintentionally?
Publishing lies that were generated by the plausible-lie-generating-machine is a very intentional action, it's not a "mistake".
The legal profession uses the term "reckless disregard", see, e.g., [1].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._Sullivan
It’s illegal to make factual errors. Wow, cool, I guess we solved science very easily!
1 reply →