But how would that work reliably? If I make the statement that "David Mayer" is criminal, an international terrorist or a Nickelback fan, that's definitely libelous. But if I say those things about Osama bin Laden, they're just simply facts. [1]
The legal AI would be impossible to calibrate: either it has the categorize everything that could possibly be construed as libel as illegal, and therefore basically ban all output related to not just contemporary criminal actors, but also historical ones [2], or it would have to let a lot of things slip through the cracks -- essentially, whenever the output to validate suggests that someone's sexual misconduct is proven in court, it would have to allow that, even if that court case is just the LLM's halluzination. There's just no way for the legal model to tell the difference.
[1]: I could not find any sources that corroborate the statement that bin Laden is into Nickelback, but I think it follows from the other two statements.
[2]: Calling Christopher Columbus a rapist isn't libel, and conversely, describing him in other terms is misleading at best, historically revisionist at worst.
> [1]: I could not find any sources that corroborate the statement that bin Laden is into Nickelback, but I think it follows from the other two statements.
Pretty sure the literature makes it clear he's a fan of show tunes. So it's down to your conscience and moral backbone as to whether this is better or worse.
The legal AI would be impossible to calibrate: either it has the categorize everything that could possibly be construed as libel as illegal, and therefore basically ban all output related to not just contemporary criminal actors, but also historical ones [2], or it would have to let a lot of things slip through the cracks -- essentially, whenever the output to validate suggests that someone's sexual misconduct is proven in court, it would have to allow that, even if that court case is just the LLM's halluzination. There's just no way for the legal model to tell the difference.
[1]: I could not find any sources that corroborate the statement that bin Laden is into Nickelback, but I think it follows from the other two statements.
[2]: Calling Christopher Columbus a rapist isn't libel, and conversely, describing him in other terms is misleading at best, historically revisionist at worst.