Indeed, when prosecutors tested Claude by asking whether it could give legal advice, the bot advised them to "consult with a qualified attorney."

It's astounding they bothered asking Claude that question. They are pre-supposing Claude is qualified to answer the question in the first place. What would they have done if Claude had said yes? Claude is no more qualified than a toaster to give legal advice. If it's a question of legality, then Claude is *not* the one to ask; the court should know the answer to that question without having to consult anybody but the current laws.

For decades Madison Avenue has been using psychology to get you to buy products. Just say no.

We've all seen this comic strip before. Microsoft is Lucy. Windows is the football. Consumers (you and me) are Charlie Brown.

This. Unlimited messages to scroll through, scammers, pedophiles, weirdos, etc. all existed decades ago on BBSes and Usenet, and yet those never got legislated out of existence.

Two words: Personal responsibility

I installed 100 surveillance cameras in my warehouse, which means I hired 100 "employees" to watch over my warehouse.

See how stupid this sounds?

AI agents, regardless of their sophistication, are not employees. They are tools to be used by employees, even if only one employee is using them. Hell, even if an AI agent controls another AI agent, they're both tools, and neither is an actual employee, even if they do work that was once done by an employee.

Since the company has access to all your emails, you'd think it would be trivial for them to ask an LLM to "Give me the top five accomplishments made by each employee over the past 12 months, and at the end give me a recommendation on who I should promote and who I should let go."

Of course, that means smart employees will send emails like "So, looks like I can single-handedly save the company $1M/day with this awesome idea I came up with."

Trump Mobile initially indicated the T1's screen measured 6.78 inches, but now claims it is 6.25 inches.

Probably more like a micro-phone, if you know what I mean.

If I move to California tomorrow, will they be required to delete any information about me prior to my move?

Just get a can of Russian Fix-a-Flatski

Or leave it running forever, and just add a disclaimer that information provided by the chatbot is not intended to be accurate, use at your own risk, caveat emptor. Problem solved!

"Monitoring" is all but useless once a malicious actor opens a new account in your name. With persistence you may be able to reverse the damage to your credit, but you have to put in the effort yourself because the credit monitoring companies and credit reporting agencies sure won't do it of their own accord. And even if you manage to set the record straight, *somebody* has to pay for all the purchases made on the fraudulent credit cards obtained in your name before they were shut down. In the end, we all pay.

The solution isn't credit monitoring, but better controls on your account to begin with.

Declare the current collection of garbage to be a sculpture. Problem solved.

Pretty sure the existing Windows code is already non-human-modifiable, otherwise they would've fixed the bugs by now.

Why? There's sure to be plenty of work fixing the inevitable bugs this project generates.

The legal notice says Google has copied a "large corpus" of Disney's works to train its gen AI models, which is believable, as Google's image and video models will happily produce popular Disney characters -- they couldn't do that without feeding the models lots of Disney data.

Not true. Google could have fed the models data produced by other people, e.g. fan fiction, parodies, etc. (But, that being said, we all know that Google probably did feed their models with actual Disney content, wink-wink.)