this post was submitted on 07 Oct 2025
263 points (99.3% liked)

Technology

75963 readers
2983 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 61 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

And a partial refund at that.

Better option would be to require the senior Deloitte partners and managers to do real community service program (live-in junior janitor at homeless shelter or a hospice) for 6 months (with an asset freeze for the duration of community service).

[–] N0t_5ure@lemmy.world 30 points 4 days ago (2 children)

It's ridiculous. The fact that a significant part of the report was clearly fraudulent calls into question the merit of the entire report. How could anyone take it seriously after finding dozens of fraudulent sources? They should sue to recover 100% of what was paid.

[–] Salvo@aussie.zone 2 points 2 days ago

The thing is that these reports (and training material and industry analysis) is Deloitte’s bread-and-butter.

If they have begun outsourcing their product to an LLM, and believe that the new is comparable to the product they previously provided, they are admitting that everything they have ever produced is garage and no one should be paying them anything.

[–] Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 16 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

I still think personal responsibility (as outlined in my post above) is a far better option that a fine.

A fine is the cost of business. I don't think a senior Deloitte partner or manager would like to do a 6 month mandatory de-mining community service program (Australia can send them to my country, Ukraine, as part of a community service exchange program).

[–] Hupf@feddit.org 7 points 4 days ago

mandatory de-mining

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 3 points 4 days ago

Partners and managers (at least senior ones) are held accountable for profitability. A fine directly hits their bonuses. But holding the partners personally liable for fraud would be a good thing to do as well.