Louis Ingenthron @LouisIngenthron@social.cleverlibre.org

@Iwillyeah Yes, Europe in general is much more draconian about free speech than the US. I can't speak to the laws there.

@Iwillyeah Yes, South Park is satire. But *why* is satire protected? Because the context and nature of humor prevents it from being legally considered to be statements of fact. Same here. It's a tech demo toy, not an oracle.

And no, that wouldn't bother me, because I understand that ChatGPT doesn't even understand the concept of 'facts'. So, I assume falsity as a baseline. And, honestly, I think a lot less of anyone foolish enough to believe anything a chatbot tells them.

@Iwillyeah I could be wrong, but I don't think there is such a thing as "negligent defamation" in the law.

@Iwillyeah If you include the whole bit, "Grammatically correct, not factually correct", then quite a lot, actually. Context matters, which is why, for example, South Park is able to get away with what it does. Defamation in the United States requires, among other things, a false statement of fact.
So, if you preface your speech with "this may not be true", you're no longer making statements of fact, in context.
Your sandwich board would essentially be serving the same purpose as a disclaimer at the beginning of a comedy program.

@misc Yes, it was a silly argument, intentionally so, as it was lampooning an absolutist statement.

Sorry for spamming your notifications. But I'm at the end of my rope with that one, so the thread's over anyway.

@kyozou @misc @DuncanWatson @caseynewton By that logic, Microsoft Word was programmed to create defamatory content because people can type defamatory content into it. In both cases, the program is responding to user input, not acting on its own.

@kyozou @misc @DuncanWatson @caseynewton If they "programmed a computer to spit out clearly defamatory material", then why is 99% of the material produced non-defamatory?