this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2026
880 points (99.1% liked)
Technology
81374 readers
4836 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Sue them for what? He would have to prove damages and they took it down.
Libel. Taking it down doesn’t undo the damage to reputation which libel is concerned with. They might not get any monetary damages awarded but could maybe force Ars to put out a retraction.
They put out a retraction: https://arstechnica.com/staff/2026/02/editors-note-retraction-of-article-containing-fabricated-quotations/
As much as I would like to see that happen paying to fight a court case against Conde Nast just to get a retraction that they will stick somewhere invisible doesn't really sound like a winning formula.
Letting them win because you’ve conceded before even playing is also a losing formula. Even if they don’t get awarded monetary damages they can probably at least get their legal expenses covered.
They pulled the article. What more are you hoping for?
To what end?
Well it'll be nice if they admitted wrongdoing
They admitted wrongdoing: https://arstechnica.com/staff/2026/02/editors-note-retraction-of-article-containing-fabricated-quotations/
How about getting them to put an "e" after the "s" in their name instead?
In the US, libel requires you to prove that the writer knew that what they were writing is not true and that they did it to hurt you. Doing lazy research and trusting an AI is not going to meet that standard.
They didn't do lazy research. They didn't do any research, the lazy bums. They put a pump into an AI copy and pasted the output into a blog post and hit post. The only way they could have done less work is if they'd integrated the AI into the website to save them have to do the copy and paste.
Publicly making false statements using his name isn't a crime by itself in his jurisdiction?
No, there are a bunch of things required to be met in the US for libel and a bunch of precedent which is why it's hard to sue for it and succeed
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law