Not really of course. Should make eatable dishes with correct nutritional value, if thats what you are offering.
> In a warning notice appended to the meal-planner, it warns that the recipes “are not reviewed by a human being” and that the company does not guarantee “that any recipe will be a complete or balanced meal, or suitable for consumption”.
It is explicit in that it does not offer "dishes with correct nutritional value"
Whether you should be allowed to label/market this as "meal planner", given that you can't label a milk replacement "milk replacement" in many countries, is up for debate, but the software itself is allegedly not dishonest (according to the article, I haven't tried it myself)
If you are asking to make a recipe of a bike & sand, it should simply say not possible.
Im not saying you shouldn't launch, or call it a fun or experimental tool, but to just disclaimer your way out of things is too easy.
Who would ask this LLM to make a recipe involving bleach and then actually proceed to make it? Such a person is already at risk of poisoning themselves, the software doesn't suggest it by itself so I don't see how it increases the risk of harm
It's not a LLM product, it's not advertised as a general LLM that will generate text based on input of shopping items, it's specifically advertised as an AI meal planner and it's not fit for that purpose since it does not guard against non-meals.
That's the issue, the user is supposed to be a layman, not someone that knows and understands LLMs and its limitations.