[jqpabc123]

it’s ridiculous to create liability for AI chatbots.

Liability isn't being *created* here, it has existed legally for a very long time.

False information can cause real harm --- and the legal burden of proof is on the source.

Search engines were provided legal exemption on the basis that they were simply quoting/referencing 3rd party sources who where legally liable for the content.

LLM chatbots legally exceed these bounds by fabricating info/content on their own ---data that does not exist elsewhere. This is a liability issue waiting to happen as there is no other responsible party/source to blame.

[WarmWash]

AI overviews cites it's sources though...

[pesus]

And often still makes claims that completely contradict those sources it's "citing".

[jqpabc123]

Yes, AI would never list irrelevant sources and fabricate links.

https://blog.platinumids.com/blog/ai-hallucination-crisis-co...

[WarmWash]

AI overviews automatically produces links to it's sources for each statement, so it's trivial to check.

[jqpabc123]

so it's trivial to check.

It's trivial to use a search engine instead of AI. But people still use AI to save the time needed to read and check.

But in any case, none of this absolves slander. The legal burden of proof is still on the source --- which is AI.