3 ms·
This is also another obvious example of misalignment on the part of ChatGPT. If the thing had any semblance of an actual system of ethics, or emulation thereof,
by Sharlin 2mo ago
This is also another obvious example of misalignment on the part of ChatGPT. If the thing had any semblance of an actual system of ethics, or emulation thereof, it would refuse requests to try to make facts fit a predetermined conclusion. In a legal case, no less!
- tortasaur 2mo agoDoesn't the entire court system hinge upon both sides attempting to make facts fit a predetermined conclusion?
- Sharlin 2mo agoNo in the case of an expert witness. And ChatGPT is not, should not and can not be party to any legal proceeding. It isn't even remotely ethically sound to help people twist facts for their own purposes.
- tortasaur 2mo agoIt doesn't feel intellectually honest to suggest that expert witnesses are there for any other reason than to promote the case of the side that hired them. They rarely outright lie, but "try to make facts fit a predetermined conclusion" is their job description. They would not be brought to the stand otherwise. I agree that there are ethical problems around helping people twist facts for their own purposes. My point is that everyone in a courtroom except the judge and jury are there to do exactly that. They make the strongest possible case to get their desired outcome from the available facts.
- suburban_strike 2mo agoTruth is relative. The Kuleshov effect exists in reality. You see a solemn man looking at a cup and see a man lost in thought; I see a man irritated that the waitress hasn't returned yet. Courts are all a show. It doesn't prove which side is "right," only who can make a more convincing argument. LLMs are a natural fit. There is no such thing as justice.