Clojurians Log v2

This is big. The responsibility issue has been lurking in the horizon for so long. You just cannot produce stuff with AI and then declare that "it's not my fault".

Yeah there's a great book on this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Unaccountability_Machine

^LLM are the final form of this in action

Isn't there a downside of this, setting a precedent that Google's AI-produced copy is Google's own IP?

You can't win

"You can no longer lie to the public." This made me smile!

> At the hearing, Google argued that users could check the linked sources themselves to verify whether the AI summary was correct. Users generally knew "that information generated with AI should not be blindly trusted," the company claimed. That's a remarkable statement given the scale at which Google serves AI overviews. It's also not entirely true, since the connection between sources and generated content isn't always there. I really wish I could just say "give me sources, or stay silent".

@jeaye Is it saying that it’s their IP though? I haven’t read the ruling, but I don’t think that follows automatically from “it’s their own words”. It can be their words, and still contain plagiarism, right?

in the US the copyright office has been pretty diligently defending the idea that https://doctorow.medium.com/https-pluralistic-net-2026-03-03-its-a-trap-inheres-at-the-moment-of-fixation-f590dc4efbf2, which is a potentially separate question from liability. to give a tendentious analogy to the famous https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_dispute copyright case: if you turn a monkey loose and it takes a selfie you can't copyright it, but you might still be liable if it smashes someone else's camera 😉