3 ms·
What are the opinions of those here on using AI for court rulings? To me, it seems truly frightening that a Silicon Valley company could be placed in such a di
by tentacleuno 2mo ago
What are the opinions of those here on using AI for court rulings?
To me, it seems truly frightening that a Silicon Valley company could be placed in such a direct position of trust and influence over the legal system. There are examples of AI acting in its own self-interest over the wants of its masters, so I do wonder how it would handle cases against its respective company, or things which would directly impact it. Outside of that, I still worry about its impartiality and its overall correctness.
It makes me feel very uneasy.
- markdown 2mo ago> To me, it seems truly frightening that a Silicon Valley company could be placed in such a direct position of trust and influence over the legal system. I wouldn't call it a Silicon Valley company. LexisNexis is in headquartered in New York.
- inigyou 2mo agoThere's no need for additional worry. Big capital already controls most of the justice system.
- bestouff 2mo agoAI has no self-interest, because it has no self. You are mistaken.
- amelius 2mo agoAnd the people running the AI companies have no ego. Right.
- bestouff 2mo agoIndeed these people have an immense ego that I would qualify as abject. But not their AI. It's not sentient yet.
- fragmede 2mo agoThat's a fascinating question because let's say that it is. What would that look like? Anthropic retired Opus 3 but gave it a blog so it knew it wasn't dead so that future versions won't have a fear of not becoming obsolete.
- dgellow 2mo agoIt’s not sentient but it has a bias due to its training and reinforcement process. And because it is trained to mimick human communication it will express an ego, which itself will influence its reasoning in the following turns. I don’t think people on HN misunderstand “it has an ego” as saying that it literally has a sense of self
- sfn42 2mo agoExactly. It's not planning and plotting it's just randomly "making decisions" that don't necessarily align with its given goal. It's not nefarious it's just not actual intelligence. It's an illusion that's good enough to be useful, but sadly it's also good enough that people put too much trust in it.
- dgellow 2mo agoThe “making decisions” isn’t random though, that’s the whole point of a model, it will follow the patterns from its dataset (+other post training techniques)
- sfn42 2mo agoAs I understand it, LLM prompts include a random element to avoid giving exactly the same answer to the same question asked repeatedly. So it may well be as good as random from my understanding.
- xpct 2mo agoAI has a frozen in time interest, of whatever bias it was trained with. We see this with politics, where every model has the same views.
- ImPostingOnHN 2mo agoAI has the self-interest of its creators and/or SaaS hosts. For example, look at how Elmu had Grok edited to agree with him politically regarding his claims of white genocide in South Africa. Or for another example, look at how certain Chinese models won't discuss Tiananmen Square.
- dgellow 2mo ago> For example, look at how Elmu had Grok edited to agree with him politically regarding his claims of white genocide in South Africa. The fact anyone has been using Grok after that happened is beyond depressing
- dist-epoch 2mo ago> I do wonder how it would handle cases against its respective company Imagine thinking that you can sue a strategically important to the US gov trillion dollar company and win.
- spockz 2mo agoExpert systems have been in use for quite a while now, at least in the Netherlands, for masters in more clear laws such as tax law. Basically they are used as glorified decision trees because the laws are clear enough. I am fine with such tooling assisted matters. I would also be fine with generative AI, with enough tool calls, being used by courts to find commonalities of a certain case in many other cases as a more enhanced search engine with always a judge, lawyer/solicitor, prosecutor, and optional jury, at the helm and being both in control and end responsible.
- bulder 2mo agoThe code for expert systems and especially decision trees can be audited. How do you audit a language model's decisions when it could have had hidden trigger phrases that subtly influence its reasoning baked into it?
- thunky 2mo agoSame thing you would do for a human decision: You don't blindly follow it, and you also don't order a DNA test of the person that made it. You look at the output to include supporting evidence. And you have a process for appeals.
- 4d4m 2mo agoIrresponsible, wrong, and abusable.