• 2 Posts
  • 267 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: September 29th, 2025

help-circle


  • In a quote in the article, one of the judges even points this out to him rather harshly.

    “So, Counsel, do you watch the news? Do you listen to the radio? Do you read anything about what’s going on in the world?” one of the judges asked Aarons. “Because the problem with lawyers relying on AI hallucinations is an above-the-fold story every single day.”

    …

    “So, either you buried your head in the sand. And that’s a choice to do that. An intentional choice to be uninformed,” the judge continued to Aarons. “Or, you took a gamble. And neither of those are consistent with the code of conduct. So I’m really struggling with your response, saying, ‘Well, I didn’t understand. I didn’t know about hallucinations.’ My 13-year-old nephew knows about hallucinations. My 75-year-old stepmother knows about hallucinations. So, either you made a decision not to be aware of what’s happening in the world in using this tool appropriately, which is a willful choice. Or you decided to roll the dice.”

    The article also provides links to five other cases where lawyers used an LLM and filed AI hallucinations as fact. This bozo is clearly in the find out phase.





  • Nothing. The headline and the article do not match.

    The judge’s ruling does not label the use of Flock data to aid in arrests as illegal, rather, it clarifies that the officer in this case did not have probable cause to “intruded on her reasonable expectation of privacy” with the technology — setting stricter precedent for when law enforcement may employ extensive ALPR databases during investigations.

    So the cameras recording our every movement are just fine and dandy. It’s just in this case, the officer didn’t have probably cause to dip into that massive database before noting a minor traffic infraction. It seems like the judge ruled that the officer needed to follow her around until she made an infraction and then violated the hell out of her privacy. So, no real change at all.

    Also…

    A spokesperson for Flock told The Hill, “The ruling goes against the overwhelming weight of authority in similar cases across the country, including multiple recent decisions in Oklahoma, and we expect it will be appealed and ultimately overturned.”

    Yep. I imagine even the very slight limitation to Flock use resulting from this ruling will end up getting overturned by the appeals court, state supreme court or SCOTUS.














  • While I would very much like to save the environment on Earth, people are not going to stop consuming the planet’s resources and allow that to happen. Equally as important, we don’t know how to save our environment. Do you know how to terraform the Sahara? I don’t. In fact, there are dozens of scientists with dozens of different ideas of things we can try that could help mitigate global warming and help restore natural environments. But doing so would amount to performing experiments on the Earth’s biosphere and we only have one biosphere to work with. If the experiments goes wrong, which any researcher can tell you is very likely, then we could do even more damage and maybe have no biosphere left at all.

    A better plan is to go someplace like Mars and experiment there. Learn how to create and manipulate a biosphere someplace where a failed experiment won’t potentially wreck the biosphere we need live in.

    Edit to add: Do you really want to let the Elon Musks of the world spread reflective dust in the ionosphere, or launch a giant sun-shade into orbit to block some of the sun’s light from hitting the planet? Wouldn’t it be better to do the experiments somewhere else?