Federal Right to Privacy Act – Draft legislation

Re:Federal Right to Privacy Act – Draft legislation by samrus on Monday March 16, 2026 @09:08AM (#47398507)

Thats a bit pedantic. Youre still arguing against an entity rather than addressing the argument.

If you prompted an LLM to make a PSA that people should brush their teeth, is it a fair to argue that brushing your teeth is bad because an LLM made the argument?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Federal Right to Privacy Act – Draft legislation by egberts1 on Monday March 16, 2026 @10:18AM (#47399399)

Let's call it "Ad machinam".

A literal form of "to the machine”: none of the rights that a person has.

Example usage:

“That’s not a rebuttal; it’s an argumentum ad machinam -- you’re rejecting it just because AI wrote it.”

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Federal Right to Privacy Act – Draft legislation by normalaccess on Monday March 16, 2026 @11:48AM (#47400590)

And really when you think about it, all AI is is just the a statical recombination of (almost) everything that (almost) everyone has written.

So it's a kind of mechanical recombination of ideas.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Federal Right to Privacy Act – Draft legislation by egberts1 on Monday March 16, 2026 @03:51PM (#47403935)

Almost like reject the argument because the logical reasoning was supplied emotionally.

[ Parent | on HN ]