Cop puts in a case number. Foreign system queries cop system, asks "is this a valid active case number?" Cop system responds "yes" or "no" and foreign system reacts accordingly. Rate limiting and fail2ban or similar prevents an attacker from using it to enumerate valid active cases, though that information is probably public and available via FOIA anyway.

Don't threaten me with a good time.

And meanwhile it's very clear that LLMs cannot cite their sources. When they claim they have done so, a review of the alleged citation generally reveals that it does not in fact support the claims, much like when using Google you find that the page does not in fact include the terms you searched for. And ironically, Google does both of those things to you, because IME Gemini's citations are almost never legitimate.

We have been talking about it here.

Same answer as your other bullshit.

Fuck off, coward.

You forgot to check the "post anonymously" box on your racist troll there, sport.

Because what it's doing is clearly not the same thing, and also because we have other words which are better suited to the case like "process". If you're not going to invent a new word, or borrow a word, then at least use the word which makes the most sense.

Oh yeah I forgot to mention MERLIN, that was what I wanted to write about first. You can buy access to MERLIN via a data broker if you are in any industry which has a legitimate business interest. The prime example is debt collection but there's also PIs and mortgage officers and so on that can look up that data. All you really need to get access is a business license and a credit card. It doesn't let you look up SSNs, but you can look up a ton of shit even without one, and a metric fuckton with. So basically any asshole could be buying access to your PII and would probably never get caught because there's essentially no oversight. It's been a while since I had MERLIN access, but last I did the broker I used just had a checkbox to affirm you had a legitimate purpose!

That's how accountable they are now. Databases of PII you have to pay to access are just as accountable. There's a field, you enter something into the field or not, you click the button and get the report. For example Equifax's service The Work Number has a field for a tracking number but it's completely optional. I can put anything or nothing there when I use it. (As a rule, I put in nothing, because I am not trying to leak the slightest bit of unnecessary information to Equifax. It's bad enough you have to tell them what your business purpose is. It is statutorily none of their business!)

That was certainly a fine example of talking past the point.

Yeah, you seem to have all the facts, but still don't get what the subject is.

Before the master gets his thousands of hours he is an apprentice and will benefit from union wages.

After the master becomes the master and no longer benefits from the union, he's benefited in becoming the master, he might never have got there otherwise, and he can give something back because all that he has was predicated on that.

Only selfish pricks would think otherwise.

Many other countries do not have it and they are not dens of lawlessness.

Indeed. Also, stealing somebody else's work in this way is basically career-death for academics. They may lose their job and become unemployable. They may lose their PhD. Hence it does happen very rarely. Obviously the LLMs and their handlers have no such qualms.

It is no surprise that quite a few enterprises have strict prohibitions against putting any company data into LLMs.
Also the OWASP LLM Top 10 (https://genai.owasp.org/resource/owasp-genai-llm-top-10-2026/) list this as the 2nd most serious risk.

It is stealing if you do not cite all of them in your publication. The standards for scientific misconduct are VERY clear: You are not allowed to hide your sources.

That is easy: All of them. LLMs cannot do original work because they have no mechanism for insight. Yes, the LLM cultists will aggressively dispute that fact.

Since they almost certainly obtained those inputs in shady ways, it is no surprise they refuse to publish them though. Also note that any kind of scientific publication has been required for a long, long time to cite all inputs to be regarded as sound. Doing anything else is regarded as serious scientific misconduct and can, for example, get your PhD removed.