> Didn’t the media cover this already over and over since ChatGPT’s inception?
This is not “the media”. noyb isn’t reporting on what other people did, they are informing us of what they just did.
> Not that it isn’t important but to imply it is a new revelation seems sensationalist.
The article isn’t about the failings of ChatGPT, it’s about a specific legal complaint being made.
> Why would inaccurate information be at all acceptable for homework?
It’s acceptable in a legal sense, you get a bad grade and that’s that. But falsehoods about a particular individual on a popular resource could be quite damaging and are against EU law.
> This article is bad.
Rather, you completely misunderstood it.