Ah, the ole' fiddler/diddler switcheroo.

The Diddler on the Roof does sound like it'd make for a captivating musical though. Shades of The Nightman Cometh.

Google:

"No need to sue us. Mr Maclsaac was listed in Google search as a sex offender, but wasn't actually on the sex offender registry. But no worry, we've fixed the problem! We have several government records contracts. Our LLM simply corrected the record and added Ashley to the sex offender registry. The error has been resolved."

Guitarists are often fingering a minor

It's a common misconception about fiddlers. It's actually saxophonists.

Buttle, Tuttle. Fiddler, diddler.

These things happen with AI.

Google’s AI Overview about MacIsaac now includes the statement: “In late 2025 and 2026, he made headlines for taking legal action against Google.”

lmao fuck off google.

Now they will accuse random people, to draw attention away from the pedo in chief.

Got mixed up with his brother: Canadian Diddler

Diddler fiddler, what's the difference

Fiddler on the bench.

Only $1.5 million? That's peanuts, especially to Google and especially for such heinous defamation. It should be for at least 100 million.

Internet companies have become way too used to hiding behind Section 230 of the Communications Act which allows them to say that anything on their sites was created by a user, not by them, and therefore they're not liable. This made sense when the Internet was just chronological forums and there was no way for the operator to know that something defamatory or illegal had been posted.

They've managed to maintain that fiction, even when hand-picking content they want to show. Now they have algorithms that scan all the content people post, even videos, decide which content is going to generate the most views, clicks and engagement, and choose to prioritize that content, even if it is illegal.

But, now, with AI, they're actually the ones generating that content. There's no user to hide behind anymore. Let's hope that the courts say that section 230 doesn't protect them here and that they're liable for all false claims made with AI, just as they'd be liable if it were an employee or the boss who posted it.

Sue for more than $1.5M bro

Sue for $1T.

Fuck em. Be as egregious as them.

Not sure if this is wider than the UK, but the word "fiddler" is often used here to describe someone who sexually assaults children. AI may well have decided this to be the case here.

Did the AI get the wrong end of the stick because of the word "fiddler"?

Mr MacIsaac had similar slander before, like 20 years ago. I would not be surprised to find that lie fed this one.

He'll get a correction and maybe a few bucks. Shit happens all the fucking time with journalism.

So google misheard that he was a diddler… instead of a fiddler…

If you think Google's is bad, wait till you hear about the one the dbzer0 instance admins and mods are running on random people on the fediverse...

I hope he wins the lawsuit and Google has to pay him millions in damages.

Fiddler, Google. With an F.

Wrong Canadian musician, Google. You were thinking of Drake

Lemme guess... They called him a diddler?

Wikipedia had to deal with this same sort of thing with the biography of living persons policy after vandalism of John Seigenthaler's article included defamatory material in 2005. With many people coming to rely on AI summaries at least for first impressions, AI companies need to lose some lawsuits until they fix their software.