3 ms·
This is a local procedural rule for one federal judge in Texas. It affects a few dozen people (mostly lawyers). Why was it on HN #1? Are people misinterpreting
by perihelions 3y ago
This is a local procedural rule for one federal judge in Texas. It affects a few dozen people (mostly lawyers). Why was it on HN #1? Are people misinterpreting the title, thinking it's something that remotely matters?
- dpifke 3y agoIt follows from recent HN discussions: ChatGPT-Authored Legal Filing “Replete with Citations to Non-Existent Cases" (62 points, 71 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36092509 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36092509 Lawyer cites fake cases invented by ChatGPT, judge is not amused (343 points, 306 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36097900 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36097900 A man sued Avianca Airline – his lawyer used ChatGPT (167 points, 129 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36095352 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36095352 It's also likely the first of similar local rules in other courts, and it wouldn't surprise me if an equivalent rule is eventually added to the FRCP.
- rylittle 3y agoIs it not fascinating to watch changes to our world in real time due to genAi? This is small but its likely the very first of many rules that will become huge
- ldehaan 3y ago[dead]
- SllX 3y agoIt's a good and well-explained rule. It's worth reading regardless of prevalence, and one judge making one procedural change to start with is one of the ways in which the Law can start to evolve and change to adapt to new circumstances.