you want to kiss me so bad it makes you look stupid @robinaxolotl - Tumblr Blog

letsbelonelytogetherr

— Nina LaCour via letsbelonelytogetherr

zac-n

Ya if you say so bud

#obey me

shotofchinaco

Brian McFadden: Is Google Cooked? (via Daily Kos)

hillhomed

apple family dinner for a lineart exercise

#mlp

bloodenjoyer

if yaoi is wrong …i don’t Wnat to be right…

coffinman21-deactivated20260301

ashbelero

Please keep buying and consuming yaoi, if it was only made for gay men it would die as a medium TOMORROW

commandersheena

In one of my film classes last semester we had to tell a story in 3 pictures for a mini assignment so my friend and I did this

impropercorvus

Can’t deal!

#p5

magicratfingers

sound on

cosmicdraghon

#sxf

derpy-the-tiger

YOR I'M SO PROUD OF YOU GIRL!!!!

She openly says what she wants

She does it calmly

She does it without any kicking involved

Also she decided to try without more alcohol

#sxf

bunidochi

on my way to cuddle my husband but my brother with a sister complex is there:

chapter 136 was so peak

not today...

A German regional court has ruled that Google is directly liable for the content of its AI search overviews. According to the court, previou

ayeforscotland

Let’s fucking go

made-in-manetheren

This is HUGE.

1. The court holds Google responsible for statements made by its AI, considering them Google's statements (search engines have limited liability for results in their engine as they're the words of other sites/companies/people), meaning when their AI lies/hallucinates they're liable for the defamation/harm resulting from those statements.

2. Google's defense that customers are generally aware of the lack of reliability and are responsible for fact checking was dismissed. As the court pointed out, that would "significantly diminish" AI Search's stated purpose and it can't be distinguished from Google's business practices/statements as a search tool.

3. Studies have found about 91% of Google's everyday AI responses are accurate, leaving millions of searches per HOUR with potential liability for falsehoods. 56% of correct responses weren't supported by the sources the AI listed. Both of which mean Google is now liable for a LOT more AI "errors."

4. Google was held liable for 80% of court costs in this case and this precedent is expected to reverberate around the world. This is a massive shift from the 3rd-party search provider role Google has previously played and it comes right as they've tied ALL searches to their AI search.

TL;DR Google reeeeeally stepped in it this time.

alianoralacanta

5. If the words are Google's, this solidifies the position of universities who demand that all answers from AI are fully cited. If all the in-line citations now have to be (Google, 2026), that's going to make it obvious when someone's trying to use Google as a source. There's still the difficulty with people who are academically dishonest by trying to pass off the AI writing as their own. 6. 91% accuracy is officially too low to use as a source of references, which means the AI can't be used as a source of references either. This makes it less legitimate for such purposes than Wikipedia of all places (Wikipedia might need date/time proof of when it was accessed for the reference to be valid, but at least it is possible to prove the link existed at a particular date and time). 7. This will help encourage the rollout of courses on how to avoid AI search for students who need academic accuracy, because it's statistically not good enough to use. 8. This strengthens the case intellectual property authors have against Google in the EU, as this is proof that an intellectual property transfer took place.