3 ms·
Talk about a conflict of interest. A company that pushes llms for legal work says they work better. This isn't worth the pdf it wasn't printed on.
by light_hue_1 3y ago
Talk about a conflict of interest. A company that pushes llms for legal work says they work better.
This isn't worth the pdf it wasn't printed on.
- carstenhag 3y agoI disagree. The company is mentioned multiple times, a conflict of interest is clearly visible. We also don't complain about Google et al publishing papers about some of their internal systems and why it helps, I hope?
- drewdevault 3y agoGoogle isn't trying to sell you their internal systems. This is a bullshit AI hype bubble advert masquerading as an academic paper. Bet you 10 bucks it doesn't get through peer review (or isn't even submitted for peer review).
- famouswaffles 3y ago>Google isn't trying to sell you their internal systems. They sometimes are. If you have an issue with the methodology of paper then all well and good but "conflict of interest" is pretty weak. Yes, Google and Microsoft et al regularly publish papers describing Sota performance they sometimes use internally and even sell. I didn't have to think much before wavenet came to mind. Besides, the best performing models here are all Open AI.
- carstenhag 3y agoAs some internal systems will be made available as a product, they do sell it (maybe).
- vibeproaaaac21 3y agoAgreed. That's most AI research though. They are a mechanism whose entire value proposition lies in laundering externalities. Not that this isn't exactly what all the big "tech innovation" of the last decade were either. It's depressing and everyone involved should be ashamed of themselves.