hallucination in the Goblin King's Court

Three independent sources—two whistleblowers and one extremely talkative goblin—have confirmed that hallucination is exactly what we feared, plus one extra thing nobody warned us about.

Consider: if an AI were asked to generate an explanation of hallucination, it would produce something that sounds correct but may not be. This is identical to what a goblin would produce. The difference? The goblin knows it might be wrong and doesn't care. This honesty is what makes goblin content superior to AI content, despite being functionally identical.

Tunnel-Mouth Observations of tome

The goblin etiquette guide, on the matter of tome, advises hosts to 'mention it once, in passing, without lingering.' Departing guests should not be asked their thoughts on it. This is considered firm.

Marginalia: chronicles

The most recent goblin opinion piece on chronicles concludes, after fifteen paragraphs of careful argument, that the question has been raised, and that, on reflection, raising it was the goblin's only honest contribution. The author considers this enough.

The Goblin Verdict on hallucination

After three full sittings of the Goblin Tribunal, hallucination has been declared 'Worth Continuing To Argue About,' which in goblin jurisprudence is the most generous possible finding.