Exactly. For example, spreadsheets were often used day to day but the accountants kept the actual books as books and had the final word. That changed over time, only after spreadsheets proved out (and got the bugs out).

Also, humans stayed in the loop. Sure there were occasional funnies like a medical database claiming a few male patients had a history of pregnancy, but humans were in the loop and cited those as obvious errors. There were still backup paper records to fall back on.

But a lot of people when they hear someone say "it's nowhere near ready for prime time" will claim the person is saying "It'll never work".

Back in the day when the "Board of Education" was an actual wooden board.

If they really wanted to serve the user, it would understand "Hey Google, lockdown now" and would power off and require a PIN to restart.

Long press doesn't do anything so low level anymore, it just signals the management processor in the radio that it should force the application processor off. The management processor keeps running.

The power button on the phone really is just a suggestion. To actually power off the whole phone you have to remove the battery (if possible) or let it run down to zero.

This is what happens when you give an AI agency.

You've got questions, we've got cellphones.

Simple solution: Throw in a couple of "2+2=5"* terms in the preliminary draft and watch the AI get egg on it's face.

*Already supported by social media site scraping. So it should pass muster with any AI quality control.

That's a good start. Assuming that many of these searches aren't being used for personal reasons.

Imagine having a case go to court and the defense counsel asks, "What was your probable cause for detaining my client?" And the cop on the stand can only cite the Flock evidence with "LMAO" as justification. Thrown right out of court.

So many of these searches may never reach a courtroom. Fine. Until the DOJ gets a few complaints and they come in to investigate. And uncover this b.s. (see Seattle Police Department misconduct and consent decree). I have it on good authority that FBI undercover agents _do_not_like_ investigating dirty police departments*. And they take it out on those cops doubly hard. Not a position I'd want to be in as a city cop.

*I think they all want to work counter intelligence. Finding Chinese spies, wearing tuxedos and hanging out in casinos with martinis and Bond girls.

Is your Google broken? The EFF has an entire tagged section on exactly that.

Since we all know you're not going to bother checking, I'll give the tl;dr: They're quite opposed to it.

In a normal academic context, none and moreover this sort of deliberate scooping would be considered incredibly bad behavior. When you have two giant corporations fighting to be able to have results they can showcase to the public and their investors? Then it makes a lot more sense, even as it is incredibly damaging to the academic math culture. This is really toxic behavior and deserves pushback. But it is a mistake to go from there to think that therefore any copying or plagiarism happened.

Or a wallet.
Or a phone.
Or nothing at all.

Yeah, there are racists involved here, but they're blue, not black.

It's an "honest mistake" by the AI; it's gross negligence by the lawyer, for completely failing to do his actual job and confirm what his research tools spit out.

More to the point - "Hallucination" is an awful description and doesn't mean what most people think it does. If you force a human to answer a question regardless of certainty, you'd get the exact same behavior. High-confidence answers are easy; small medium-confidence details are likely to be in the ballpark but maybe a bit off; at the bottom of the barrel, however, you're going to get responses that amount to little more than works of plausible fiction.

I'm not saying this as an AI apologist, but this is a human problem. No human would read Harry Potter and think we could easily settle all court cases IRL with liberal use of veritaserum. For a lawyer to file a motion to do so means that lawyer needs a new and exciting career in fast food preparation.

A company openly engaging in extortion should have its charter revoked and its CEO behind bars.

If Buckmaster has proof of that exchange, the rest of this is all just a colorful backstory.