| ▲ | Suspecting court of using AI, man injected prompts in filings to try to win case(arstechnica.com) |
| 22 points by jnord 3 hours ago | 16 comments |
| |
|
| ▲ | pcrh 12 minutes ago | parent | next [-] |
| I wonder how the court became aware of this attempt? It might be as simple as a clerk doing "select all" and noticing the extra selection? Or what else? |
| |
|
| ▲ | ruckcbek 28 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I put this stuff in my resume. |
|
| ▲ | tentacleuno 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What are the opinions of those here on using AI for court rulings? To me, it seems truly frightening that a Silicon Valley company could be placed in such a direct position of trust and influence over the legal system. There are examples of AI acting in its own self-interest over the wants of its masters, so I do wonder how it would handle cases against its respective company, or things which would directly impact it. Outside of that, I still worry about its impartiality and its overall correctness. It makes me feel very uneasy. |
| |
| ▲ | inigyou an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | There's no need for additional worry. Big capital already controls most of the justice system. | |
| ▲ | bestouff 43 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | AI has no self-interest, because it has no self. You are mistaken. | | |
| ▲ | amelius 38 minutes ago | parent [-] | | And the people running the AI companies have no ego. Right. | | |
| ▲ | bestouff 35 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Indeed these people have an immense ego that I would qualify as abject. But not their AI. It's not sentient yet. |
|
| |
| ▲ | dist-epoch 15 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > I do wonder how it would handle cases against its respective company Imagine thinking that you can sue a strategically important to the US gov trillion dollar company and win. | |
| ▲ | markdown an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | > To me, it seems truly frightening that a Silicon Valley company could be placed in such a direct position of trust and influence over the legal system. I wouldn't call it a Silicon Valley company. LexisNexis is in headquartered in New York. |
|
|
| ▲ | soupspaces an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Earlier https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49290521 |
|
| ▲ | ktallett 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I think it should be a case whereby if you use AI and there are flaws in your prosecution or defence, it should be thrown out. This is another situation whereby nuance is not handled by AI. |
| |
| ▲ | WJW an hour ago | parent [-] | | I'm not a lawyer, but if there are (severe enough) flaws in the filings the case can be thrown out already. Adding a clause for AI-generated flaws does nothing. | | |
| ▲ | ktallett 28 minutes ago | parent [-] | | It would be important to add as it removes the proof of competency of the lawyer if using AI to aid the case. | | |
| ▲ | dist-epoch 13 minutes ago | parent [-] | | What happens if AI becomes more competent than lawyers at law? Should then 100% human fillings be thrown out automatically? |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | spwa4 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| ... did he win? |
