> applicants to the Fair Work Commission will need to disclose AI use

I really don't like where this is going.

NolF 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

It is already the case in many Australian Courts and tribunals E.g. NSW Supremen Court [1] here is another tribunal [2]. Not sure why you would not like the disclosure as to how a document, statement, etc was made when the author was not the individual signing their name and may not represent their words, knowledge, beliefs etc.

[1] https://supremecourt.nsw.gov.au/documents/Practice-and-Proce... [2] https://www.pi.nsw.gov.au/resources/procedural-directions/pr...

▲

paweladamczuk 2 days ago | parent [-]

I would like everybody to be completely responsible for the words they sign with their own name and present as their own. Regardless of how the words were produced.

▲

shakna 2 days ago | parent [-]

You still will be. Disclosure of AI, helps the court know where to put you in the queue, compared to those that have actually understood the laws in hand. A matter of prioritisation, rather than responsibility.

You cannot surrender your legal obligations to an autonomous system, without violating the Commons. You would need to overturn several hundred years of legal precedent first.

▲

snypher 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

>You cannot surrender your legal obligations to an autonomous system

Ha ha. What is the legal system but autonomous, for those without the money to access it fairly?

▲

paweladamczuk 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

As if the people utilizing the judiciary system before LLMs fully understood the laws themselves.

Give me a break. These are the talking points of the elite scared that the playing field is being leveled by technology. I'm on the side of technology on this one.

	▲	shakna 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Australia, the land of LegalAid, is not some place of "elites" in law. Everyone has free access to a lawyer. Everyone has free access to the first consult with law firms.

▲

KolibriFly 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]