Comment on Air Canada must honor refund policy invented by airline’s chatbot

guyrocket@kbin.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

• Ephera@lemmy.ml ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I could see this simply resulting in every chatbot having a disclaimer that it might be spitting straight bullshit and you should not use it for legal advice.
  At this point, I do consider this a positive outcome, too, because it’s not always made obvious whether you’re talking with something intelligent or just a text generator.

  But yeah, I would still prefer, if companies simply had to have intelligent support. This race to the bottom isn’t helping humanity.

  source

  • fedroxx@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    That won’t hold up, though.

    source

    • AnActOfCreation@programming.dev ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I don’t know about that. From the article:

      Experts told the Vancouver Sun that Air Canada may have succeeded in avoiding liability in Moffatt’s case if its chatbot had warned customers that the information that the chatbot provided may not be accurate.

      source
• stoly@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I don’t know if small claims create precedent in the same way that a normal lawsuit would.

  source

  • darreninthenet@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Can only speak for the UK but as the lowest civil court here, small claims decisions are not binding on any other court (including other small claims courts) but they are considered “pervasive” and thus a judge should be aware and take them into consideration.

    source

    • Ephera@lemmy.ml ⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Yeah, I mean, at the very least, it’s a solid argumentation. Any judge who’s given a similar case and doesn’t look up, if someone else already dealt with such a case, is just doing a disservice to themselves…

      source