UK police chief admits policy relied on CoPilot hallucination

Re:UK police chief admits policy relied on CoPilot hallucina... by reena_signalhq on Wednesday January 14, 2026 @04:48AM (#46614172)

This is a perfect example of why AI outputs need human verification, especially in policy decisions.

The scary part isn't that the AI hallucinated - it's that the policy went through without anyone fact-checking the source. Makes you wonder how many other decisions are being made based on unverified AI outputs.

Critical reminder: AI is a tool, not a replacement for due diligence.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:UK police chief admits policy relied on CoPilot hallucina... by Ekaros on Wednesday January 14, 2026 @05:35AM (#46614430)

Also, was anything verified before AIs. Or was something written just accepted as given without any real critical thought or considerations.

Malice or agenda can be real. With AI it is incompetence but before AI real malice was a possibility.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:UK police chief admits policy relied on CoPilot hallucina... by defrost on Wednesday January 14, 2026 @05:44AM (#46614495)

> was anything verified before AIs.

Yes.

> With AI it is incompetence

or malice, or agenda. For example, in the linked article the West Midlands Police had an agenda to find evidence to support a ban, they asked an AI to find evidence to support a ban, and the AI obliged and "found' evidence to support a ban.

[ Parent | on HN ]