To be fair, that quote in the original article could have more context. By "The tool" they meant "AI-assisted support tool"[1]; perhaps they meant that the issue was not an AI hallucination inherent of the tool, but a fixable bug.

[1]: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/28202858-meta-ai-ag-...

▲

nvme0n1p1 4 hours ago | parent [-]

In that case, the statement is so meaningless as to be useless. Why should we care how Meta splits up their microservices? The tool still failed. They just want to redefine the "tool" as something else, anything else, to avoid having to admit something negative about their precious AI.

> The LLM correctly generated tokens according to user input, however due to a bug in a separate code path, the system did not properly verify the email address

> Nginx correctly handled the user requests according to the HTTP standard, however due to a bug in a separate code path, the system did not properly verify the email address

▲

csallen 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I mean, I think many of us are curious and enjoy hearing more details about how and where bugs like this occur. What's wrong with that?

	▲	nvme0n1p1 3 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I'd love to read a proper technical post-mortem, but this obviously isn't it. It's a carefully-worded statement from a lawyer meant to minimize liability and reputational damage to the company.
	▲	albedoa an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		There is nothing wrong with that, and nobody is saying there is. In fact, it is exactly what is being requested here!