Expert Witness to ChatGPT: "Show how 3M is 0 percent at fault"

lucfranken an hour ago | parent | next [-]

How it is made should be irrelevant in the process. There is no way to stop people using LLM’s or other tools to create products like this report.

It should be globally a standard check to verify incoming documents and to determine their validity.

The interesting part on this case is that we see the real human aspect of it. Just asking for a report only finding the positive facts instead of doing real research.

That is an ethics question. When behaving like this (and it happened before LLM’s) it should be seen as an ethics violation. If not done there is no value in those legal procedures anymore.

The facts people have to accept is that the only place to check this is the deliverable. They are lucky now to have found the source, the prompts and the background but so many reports are entered without being so obvious.

It’s a terribly huge and complicated task.

	▲	Terr_ 30 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> How it is made should be irrelevant in the process. Nonsense, almost all answers have value based on how they were reached, especially when (like this case) there's no trivial and objective verification step. For example, suppose you live next to a volcano, and I sell you some software that predicts when it will erupt. One day you dig into it and realize I just hard-coded "not today" [0] which is 99.999% accurate. Why would you be angry at me if "not today" is correct, and "how it's made is irrelevant to the process?" Tying it back to the court case, we expect professional witnesses to look at the details and then reach a conclusion, rather than pick a conclusion and try to make the details fit. Even if they render the same boolean verdict, we care about what process was taken. [0] https://xkcd.com/221/

▲

fblp an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The article is pay walled.. Does it explain why the expert witness shared screenshots of these prompts? Voluntarily or required to?

▲

meinersbur an hour ago | parent | next [-]

https://archive.is/zKgVp

> During discovery in the case, Will Moye, one of the plaintiffs’ attorneys, found a five-page document called “Citation Overlay,” which appeared to have been generated by AI. Moye recognized the Citation Overlay document as being from ChatGPT, and demanded all of the prompts Autenrieth used from 3M’s lawyers. The deposition was paused for three hours while they were gathered, and Moye was given 350 pages of ChatGPT conversations that Autenrieth had when creating the report.

▲

phlummox an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

https://archive.is/zKgVp

Many paywalls are fairly "soft", and can be got around by visiting an archived version of the page you're interested in, at https://archive.is.

	▲	close04 20 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		On the other hand archive.is is notorious for not working for many people. I am trapped in an endless reCaptcha loop, being repeatedly asked in Thai or in Japanese or any of these random Asian languages to mark "whatever" in the pictures, or being asked to scan QR codes for something, and so on.

▲

toasty228 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

We're in the meat proxy era, unplug your brain and feed the machines!

I personally know people who ask chatgpt what to eat, to which bar to go, to plan their vacations, it's insanity.

▲

scotty79 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If you let your legal process decide based on rhetoric, you'll have people use AI to generate rhetoric.

▲

jauco an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Obligatory link: the whispering earring https://gwern.net/doc/fiction/science-fiction/2012-10-03-yva...

(I couldn’t remember the title or the author. So I asked claude for it of course)

	▲	mock-possum an hour ago \| parent [-]
		It’s a fun idea, I do wonder why the artifact is locked away at the end of the story - what harm could come from it? Then again, I don’t think I’ve ever really needed help being happy - I’d be curious to hear its suggestions, but I’m not sure what it could tell me that I didn’t already know - and further, there would likely be plenty of times where it would make more sense to do the thing that doesnt bring me the most happiness. “Flex your arm by 35%” just doesn’t sound like a plausibly compelling suggestion, and “the ring is never wrong” is really only useful if my sole goal is to maximize my own happiness.

▲

x3n0ph3n3 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My father was an expert witness in construction defect and he told me about some of the times he was hired to produce a report about the causes of some defect or failure and that sometimes the entity that hired him was at fault. He usually wasn't retained for trial in those cases, but it earned him a reputation for honesty.

Seeing these pay-for-opinion "experts" fills me with a deep disgust.

▲

senectus1 40 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I hate that this is how AI is being used.. but tbh this is a nothing burger...

This is exactly what a good lawyer/team does.. they argue against what their client is accused of.

a good prosecutor should be able to dismantle the AI argument the same way they would a human argument. just because its AI generated doesn't mean its a corrupting of the process or cheating..

the process is the same either way, its corrupt or broken the same way either way, it works the same way either way.

▲

OutOfHere an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Why not just bypass the expert and just ask GPT to come to a determination? /s