What Tesla is contending is deeply troubling to the Court. Their position is that because Mr. Musk is famous and might be more of a target for deep fakes, his public statements are immune. In other words, Mr. Musk, and others in his position, can simply say whatever they like in the public domain, then hide behind the potential for their recorded statements being a deep fake to avoid taking ownership of what they did actually say and do. The Court is unwilling to set such a precedent by condoning Tesla's approach here.
Recent articles
- How often do LLMs snitch? Recreating Theo's SnitchBench with LLM - 31st May 2025
- Talking AI and jobs with Natasha Zouves for News Nation - 30th May 2025
- Large Language Models can run tools in your terminal with LLM 0.26 - 27th May 2025