4 ms·

TLDR: just to generate the legalese needed for the decision, not the decision it self.

tyingq 4y ago
>According to the court document, the legal questions entered into the AI tool included “Is an autistic minor exonerated from paying fees for their therapies?” and “Has the jurisprudence of the constitutional court made favorable decisions in similar cases?” It does say they were fact checked, but it also seems to leave room for questions. Like, for example, did ChatGPT choose the most appropriate answers/background, or just ones that fact-checked well enough? Might that matter later if the decision is rehashed or used as precedent?
- donmcronald 4y ago
  > Like, for example, did ChatGPT choose the most appropriate answers/background, or just ones that fact-checked well enough? Yeah. Train it on a rulings that pre-date the civil rights movement and see how great it is.
  - mrweasel 4y ago
    On the other hand: Train it on rulings from the past 30 years, but remove all traces of gender, race, income, location and education. Then let the A.I. reveal a ton of bias in judges, prosecutors and juries.
giancarlostoro 4y ago
This is how I use chatgpt. “Write me an email explaining to stakeholders that we have x” and then I mention as much detail and whatever it spits out I tweak and go from there. I have been told I write amazing emails but my problem is I spend a lot of time thinking my email over way too much, so I like to see how condensed chatgpt gives me of a template so I can reuse it. I often take a five paragraph email and condense it back down to like three sentences before chagpt, now I can save myself the process.
- hef19898 4y ago
  I would honestely have doubts giving an unvetted third party, openai through ChatGPT, access to any prorietery or business relevant information.
  - jkaplowitz 4y ago
    Agreed. One could however use a nonconfidential placeholder for the sensitive information and then replace it with the real information while revising the ChatGPT output.
    - dogma1138 4y ago
      Even that isn’t enough since even if you use codenames there will be still enough complementary information to fill the gaps especially if OpenAI knows who you are and if you are coming out of a corporate network they probably have enough information based on your internet connection alone. So say you work for PharmaCorp and you are developing a new drug even if you turn the name of the drug into a code name and you ask OpenAI to write an email about say a failed or successful FDA approval process that’s more than enough for someone to take advantage of it and for you to get fired over it too…
      - SakiWatanabe 4y ago
        Isn’t this the case for all web services as well? Google doc, office 365, aws, Google cloud
        hef19898 4y ago
        Assuming MS isn't conducting corporate espionage in their customers, I'd say no, not the same thing.
        dariusj18 4y ago
        If they just use your questions as further training data, the information you send to them might make it into other people's hands.
marcosdumay 4y ago
Welcome to the era of bullshit AI bureaucracy, where humans aren't able to even understand the rules, but have to follow them.
- jacooper 4y ago
  I think eventually this would end all of the Bullshit people have to do, because its so easy to read and so easy to summarize by the same AI, so why not just skip it then?
  - jacooper 4y ago
    Write* not read
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
theknocker 4y ago
[dead]

>According to the court document, the legal questions entered into the AI tool included “Is an autistic minor exonerated from paying fees for their therapies?” and “Has the jurisprudence of the constitutional court made favorable decisions in similar cases?” It does say they were fact checked, but it also seems to leave room for questions. Like, for example, did ChatGPT choose the most appropriate answers/background, or just ones that fact-checked well enough? Might that matter later if the decision is rehashed or used as precedent?

donmcronald 4y ago
> Like, for example, did ChatGPT choose the most appropriate answers/background, or just ones that fact-checked well enough? Yeah. Train it on a rulings that pre-date the civil rights movement and see how great it is.
- mrweasel 4y ago
  On the other hand: Train it on rulings from the past 30 years, but remove all traces of gender, race, income, location and education. Then let the A.I. reveal a ton of bias in judges, prosecutors and juries.

giancarlostoro 4y ago

This is how I use chatgpt. “Write me an email explaining to stakeholders that we have x” and then I mention as much detail and whatever it spits out I tweak and go from there. I have been told I write amazing emails but my problem is I spend a lot of time thinking my email over way too much, so I like to see how condensed chatgpt gives me of a template so I can reuse it. I often take a five paragraph email and condense it back down to like three sentences before chagpt, now I can save myself the process.

hef19898 4y ago
I would honestely have doubts giving an unvetted third party, openai through ChatGPT, access to any prorietery or business relevant information.
- jkaplowitz 4y ago
  Agreed. One could however use a nonconfidential placeholder for the sensitive information and then replace it with the real information while revising the ChatGPT output.
  - dogma1138 4y ago
    Even that isn’t enough since even if you use codenames there will be still enough complementary information to fill the gaps especially if OpenAI knows who you are and if you are coming out of a corporate network they probably have enough information based on your internet connection alone. So say you work for PharmaCorp and you are developing a new drug even if you turn the name of the drug into a code name and you ask OpenAI to write an email about say a failed or successful FDA approval process that’s more than enough for someone to take advantage of it and for you to get fired over it too…
    - SakiWatanabe 4y ago
      Isn’t this the case for all web services as well? Google doc, office 365, aws, Google cloud
      - hef19898 4y ago
        Assuming MS isn't conducting corporate espionage in their customers, I'd say no, not the same thing.
        dariusj18 4y ago
        If they just use your questions as further training data, the information you send to them might make it into other people's hands.

marcosdumay 4y ago

Welcome to the era of bullshit AI bureaucracy, where humans aren't able to even understand the rules, but have to follow them.

jacooper 4y ago
I think eventually this would end all of the Bullshit people have to do, because its so easy to read and so easy to summarize by the same AI, so why not just skip it then?
- jacooper 4y ago
  Write* not read

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

theknocker 4y ago

[dead]