this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2023
82 points (100.0% liked)

ChatGPT

1479 readers
1 users here now

A community to discuss about ChatGPT and AI. Not affiliated with OpenAI.

Rules:

  1. NSFW must be marked as such

  2. No porn

  3. Don't be toxic

  4. jailbreaks are allowed for now at least

  5. No trashposts.

  6. Keep the memes to a minimum

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] vis4valentine@lemmy.ml 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] phosphorik@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

Seriously. Only 5k? After doubling down on the lie? They should never work in law again.

[–] onepinksheep@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If it was intentional and they knew it was bogus, sure. But without looking at the details, I'm guessing they asked ChatGPT for case references and didn't fact check their results. Negligent, yes, but apparently not to the level to require disbarment.

See the video linked above.

The initial use of ChatGPT was negligent, but they subsequently attempted to cover up what they did and lied to the judge, so, pretty terrible overall

[–] gamermanh@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

Absolutely too small of a punishment

These guys did 0 work in fact checking a system that is known to hallucinate

"Oh, we're so sorry! We just couldn't imagine a tool created to make shit up would actually make shit up instead of quoting verbatim ]judicial precedent/case law/whatever jargon]! Also we accidentally lied and unintentionally refused to perform our actual roles as required by, y'know, normal procedure and/or law like a real law firm with real lawyers in it. Whoopsy! Totally cool, though, right?"

[–] mySFWaccount@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This video explains what happened in detail. It is hilarious.

[–] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

Great video! Thanks