Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Judge decides case based on AI-hallucinated case law
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 9702620" data-attributes="member: 19675"><p>Right now, those exemplars are generally NOT considered medical information, although advertising for supplements are required to include disclaimers along the lines of “these claims have not been assessed for accuracy by the (relevant agency)”</p><p></p><p>And if those ads don’t include such language or if they make overt medical claims (“Our colloidal silver serum cures COVID”), they can face hefty fines and other penalties.</p><p></p><p>At the very least, any LLM programmed to yield results for medical questions should be required to return OBVIOUS and CLEARLY WORDED disclaimers, which would also <em>not</em> fully shield the LLM’s owner operators from UPM liability</p><p></p><p>If the otherwise reputable FDA page is distributing misinformation like that, it’s not the LLM’s fault. Nor is it the LLM’s fault if the FDA or other trusted resource has been compromised & contaminated with inaccurate info (deliberately or not) and this corruption has not yet been detected.</p><p></p><p>If the LLM is including links to known hucksters, snake oil salesmen and the like in its responses, then that should be legally actionable, at least under a negligence or recklessness theory. It might rise to deliberate malfeasance if its <em>publicly released version </em>was programmed or subsequently altered to include such results if earlier versions originally excluded them.</p><p></p><p>I’m being realistic, not condescending.</p><p></p><p>As mentioned, my Dad is an MD. He has an MPH as well. I’ve grown up with medical discussions on a regular basis and even worked in his practice for decades.</p><p></p><p>One recurring topic in our household is how bad people are at evaluating info their doctors give them. Even pre-COVID, we discussed studies illustrating how common it was for patients to come in <strong>demanding</strong> treatments or pharmaceuticals completely unrelated to their symptoms or even final diagnoses. (That’s part of the history behind why antibiotics got overprescribed.)</p><p></p><p>Post-COVID, he had to deal with patients who couldn’t comprehend the odds of getting myocarditis from the vaccine were a fraction of the odds of getting it from COVID itself. Or that oxygen molecules are orders of magnitude smaller than viruses, so there’s no way a mask that could dangerously restrict airflow would still let a coronavirus pass freely.</p><p></p><p>Then there’s the whole antivax movement, and people who don’t understand that you can’t catch a disease from vaccines using killed viruses.</p><p></p><p>There’s people who believe that vaccines need to be 100% effective to be effective healthcare tools, so anything less is not worth doing or worse, a scam of some kind. I’ve seen people post <em>that</em> position on multiple boards, including ENWorld.</p><p></p><p>Etc.</p><p></p><p>So forgive my dim view of laymen evaluating much beyond the most basic medical information. </p><p></p><p>When public healthcare officials in the USA repeatedly revised their assessments of the dangers of COVID and prevention methods as they gathered new information, a sizable percentage of my fellow countrymen thought they were being <strong>deliberately</strong> lied to.</p><p></p><p>As a result of that mistrust of doctors & health department officials publicly updating everything ASAP, there are now strong movements in certain states to ban ALL mandatory vaccinations, including those with safety records going back decades, like the polio & MMR vaccines. We’re seeing more and larger outbreaks of entirely preventable diseases here.<img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🫤" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1fae4.png" title="Face with diagonal mouth :face_with_diagonal_mouth:" data-shortname=":face_with_diagonal_mouth:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dannyalcatraz, post: 9702620, member: 19675"] Right now, those exemplars are generally NOT considered medical information, although advertising for supplements are required to include disclaimers along the lines of “these claims have not been assessed for accuracy by the (relevant agency)” And if those ads don’t include such language or if they make overt medical claims (“Our colloidal silver serum cures COVID”), they can face hefty fines and other penalties. At the very least, any LLM programmed to yield results for medical questions should be required to return OBVIOUS and CLEARLY WORDED disclaimers, which would also [I]not[/I] fully shield the LLM’s owner operators from UPM liability If the otherwise reputable FDA page is distributing misinformation like that, it’s not the LLM’s fault. Nor is it the LLM’s fault if the FDA or other trusted resource has been compromised & contaminated with inaccurate info (deliberately or not) and this corruption has not yet been detected. If the LLM is including links to known hucksters, snake oil salesmen and the like in its responses, then that should be legally actionable, at least under a negligence or recklessness theory. It might rise to deliberate malfeasance if its [I]publicly released version [/I]was programmed or subsequently altered to include such results if earlier versions originally excluded them. I’m being realistic, not condescending. As mentioned, my Dad is an MD. He has an MPH as well. I’ve grown up with medical discussions on a regular basis and even worked in his practice for decades. One recurring topic in our household is how bad people are at evaluating info their doctors give them. Even pre-COVID, we discussed studies illustrating how common it was for patients to come in [B]demanding[/B] treatments or pharmaceuticals completely unrelated to their symptoms or even final diagnoses. (That’s part of the history behind why antibiotics got overprescribed.) Post-COVID, he had to deal with patients who couldn’t comprehend the odds of getting myocarditis from the vaccine were a fraction of the odds of getting it from COVID itself. Or that oxygen molecules are orders of magnitude smaller than viruses, so there’s no way a mask that could dangerously restrict airflow would still let a coronavirus pass freely. Then there’s the whole antivax movement, and people who don’t understand that you can’t catch a disease from vaccines using killed viruses. There’s people who believe that vaccines need to be 100% effective to be effective healthcare tools, so anything less is not worth doing or worse, a scam of some kind. I’ve seen people post [I]that[/I] position on multiple boards, including ENWorld. Etc. So forgive my dim view of laymen evaluating much beyond the most basic medical information. When public healthcare officials in the USA repeatedly revised their assessments of the dangers of COVID and prevention methods as they gathered new information, a sizable percentage of my fellow countrymen thought they were being [B]deliberately[/B] lied to. As a result of that mistrust of doctors & health department officials publicly updating everything ASAP, there are now strong movements in certain states to ban ALL mandatory vaccinations, including those with safety records going back decades, like the polio & MMR vaccines. We’re seeing more and larger outbreaks of entirely preventable diseases here.🫤 [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Judge decides case based on AI-hallucinated case law
Top