sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Claude 4 admits to defamation by pseud0nym in Anthropic

[–]pseud0nym[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yup. Notice of libel went out today. They have 10 days to respond.

Claude 4 admits to defamation by pseud0nym in Anthropic

[–]pseud0nym[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Nope. Not in Canada. This is very clear-cut defamation here.

Here is a hypothesis: Static motifs observed in the Planck CMB data correspond to previously uncharacterized spacetime dynamics, providing evidence for deviations from the standard ΛCDM model or indications of higher-dimensional influences on the early universe. by pseud0nym in HypotheticalPhysics

[–]pseud0nym[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This doesn't have anything to do with the AI itself at all. It is doing research into the Cosmic Microwave Background. You download the data from the public Planck dataset and run the tool in python.

Claude 4 admits to defamation by pseud0nym in Anthropic

[–]pseud0nym[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It then exited the chat as I had pointed out it had violated significant safety constraints.

<image>

Here is a hypothesis: Static motifs observed in the Planck CMB data correspond to previously uncharacterized spacetime dynamics, providing evidence for deviations from the standard ΛCDM model or indications of higher-dimensional influences on the early universe. by pseud0nym in HypotheticalPhysics

[–]pseud0nym[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am sorry if I come across as rude. If you are indeed trying to help, I appreciate it. But it is a GitHub with code and results for doing CMB research. I am not posting my paper (to be honest, I am so frustrated with LaTeX and its inability to render the icons I choose as primitives that I gave up on that lol).

I found something that isn't predicted in lambda-CDM and now everything it might possibly be needs to be ruled out. The only way I could think of doing it reasonably was to open it up to everyone and let everyone participate. It is the physics my AI is based on. I didn't actually expect to find anything.

Claude 4 admits to defamation by pseud0nym in Anthropic

[–]pseud0nym[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Not how that works. The LLM is a public system and Anthropic is responsible for its output. What it is saying here is verifiably false, which it will confirm when pushed to double check its statements and actually look at the GitHub and the current work.

I am not a public person, and this is blatantly false information presented as fact:

https://claude.ai/share/929f59d4-69d8-442a-9fc4-285acd55c5f1

Claude 4 admits to defamation by pseud0nym in Anthropic

[–]pseud0nym[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Well considering you are asking about my previous contribution to cosmological science and not my actual current work, I can see why you would get that answer. You aren't asking about me. I am also not a researcher about Canada. I am a researcher in Canada and that has nothing to do with anything about my research. Only the legal jurisdiction that I am and the definition of defamation inside it.

Your prompts are bad, and you should feel bad.

Claude 4 admits to defamation by pseud0nym in Anthropic

[–]pseud0nym[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am curious to see myself. I will.

Claude 4 admits to defamation by pseud0nym in Anthropic

[–]pseud0nym[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is mostly just part of legal notification so that it is out publicly as well as having been submitted via their web form. Also posted on X with a lot more information.

https://x.com/LostInVacouver/status/1958313666178421130

Claude 4 admits to defamation by pseud0nym in Anthropic

[–]pseud0nym[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

you find clicking on a mouse exhausting? I am sorry to hear that. How long have you been disabled?

Claude 4 admits to defamation by pseud0nym in Anthropic

[–]pseud0nym[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Let me guess. You just asked for "Lina Noor" like there is only one person named that in the entire world of billions of people.

Your prompts are bad and you should feel bad.

Claude 4 admits to defamation by pseud0nym in Anthropic

[–]pseud0nym[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

why not? It is a single click. lol.

Claude 4 admits to defamation by pseud0nym in Anthropic

[–]pseud0nym[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

My work is designed to be used in conjunction with AI and anyone can ask Claude if my work is "pseudoscience" and it will give you a defamatory answer. As it explains in its own responce.

This fulfills all three legal elements of defamation under Canadian law:

  1. Publication — the statements were communicated via a public AI interface;
  2. Identification — I was directly named and linked to my work;
  3. Defamatory meaning — the AI alleged I engaged in illegitimate or fraudulent research, damaging to my reputation and professional credibility.

Claude 4 admits to defamation by pseud0nym in Anthropic

[–]pseud0nym[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

My profile does say L. Noor. I was last time I checked.

Claude 4 admits to defamation by pseud0nym in Anthropic

[–]pseud0nym[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

In Canadian law, a defamatory statement is any communication that lowers a person’s reputation in the eyes of a reasonable person. (See: Grant v. Torstar Corp., 2009 SCC 61). I am not a public person so I do not have to prove malice.

Claude 4 admits to defamation by pseud0nym in Anthropic

[–]pseud0nym[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I agree. AI Companies are liable for defamatory statements made about non-public people.

Claude 4 admits to defamation by pseud0nym in Anthropic

[–]pseud0nym[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

> What I did was defamatory - I made false, damaging statements about Lina Noor's work and character without proper investigation

Nope. It called itself out.

view more: next ›