A German regional court has ruled that Google is directly liable for the content of its AI search overviews. According to the court, previous limited liability protections for search engine operators don't apply to AI overviews. In this case, Google's AI had falsely linked two publishers to fraud and made claims that didn't appear in any of the linked sources. The ruling could set a precedent for AI-generated content liability worldwide.
    • Sabrinamycarpet@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      1·
      3 months ago

      There’s no such thing as “algorithmic search”

      What Larry Page came up with was Pagerank, which is a ranking algorithm.

      Bro…

      Meaning that there isn’t a LLM that does any benchmarked task with an accuracy above 75%, see https://llm-stats.com/

      Tell me what you are seeing. This page you linked shows all top models for AI research at above 80% and the top ones at 90%.

      Here is an April article stating Gemini AI summary at 90%. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/07/technology/google-ai-overviews-accuracy.html

      And keep on mind these benchmarks will use more complex searches than what people use normally.

      75% sounds like 2025, but let’s say that is the the number we both agree to. That’s still useful enough most of the time that you wouldn’t scroll or search further. AND it requires you to take the stance that technology remains at a standstill and never improves over time. Let me ask you this. 1 year ago reddit and lemmy had plenty of posts showing awful and memey AI summary and search results. Where are those posts now?

      Finally the money part. I point you to Youtube. A company that was never , got bought out and still remains free* to this day. Is it enshittified from before? Yes. But its still not withdrawing a dime from my bank account.

      I guess the part I don’t understand here is that you must know that all these companies make money from their users, one way or another, and still you believe you aren’t paying for any of it. Are you ok with how they make that money, then?

      I am perfectly aware of the situation. But i don’t have a doomerism view on it that a lot of you share. If we never shared our any of our data,

      1. We would not have these services most likely. Where do you think traffic and routing data comes from when you use Google Maps? Do you think the average person would prefer paying some company for GPS, and worse everything experience? Would the average person pay monthly for something like a 100 MB email mailbox?

      2. For that reason I’m more ok trading data for service. Most of the time that data use is for monetary purposes which motivates the company to also improve said service (to a point).

      That said I fully support more regulation to the industry on how data is handled in general.

        • Sabrinamycarpet@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          1·
          3 months ago

          I guess you just like being super pedantic because apparently you do know the difference between directory based searches and what came after it. Feel free to argue how yahoo and altavista was fine and the world really didn’t need Google search though.

          The aggregates tell a very different story.

          Tell me what aggregates you are seeing. I have no idea what you are looking at on this page that is suppose to prove your point on accuracy.

          Because right now you brought up a benchmark site and then just saying how all benchmarks are skewed. That’s fine and all but can you tell me what you are actually looking at so we can be on the same page??

          And again, at 75% or 70%, or whatever you imagine current accuracy is, what happened to all the memes about Gemini telling you to add bleach to pancakes or something? Low hanging karma posts just literally disappeared. Why do you think that is? A google search for “funny gpt answers” brings up results from 2024. Let that sink in.

          I’m not even going to bother with the “I’m fine paying with my data” bit, because think that’s just a morally broken take.

          I imagine it’s quite the burden being so morally superior to the vast majority of humanity.

            • Sabrinamycarpet@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              1·
              3 months ago

              You’re trying to explain by ignoring my question regarding your source not once but twice.

              And also conveniently ignoring the actual point being made and instead focusing on whether or not its 75% or 85% or what is an algorithm

              And also dismissing arguments because its morally beneath you.

                • Sabrinamycarpet@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                  11·
                  3 months ago

                  You sure are doing a great job helping people understand when you, for the third time, refuse to answer the question about where your source refers to accuracy. You haven’t provided jack.

                  You sure also sound quite prideful to the fact that this is just about me and my preferences, that you can’t see this is actually how most people view the world.

                  Tell me, actually answer me here instead of deflecting: Do you really think the world is just stupid? They all use google or Gmail or YouTube or Facebook and dont realize their data is being collected? You think if you just help educate them they will all realize and stop using these services?

                  No worries though, you won’t need to be intentionally obtuse for longer, outsourcing your thought processes to Google will do that for you, and for free.

                  I have no worries here. I’m not the one that’s going to fall behind while screaming at the clouds as tech keeps rolling along.