News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Lawyers blame ChatGPT for tricking them into citing bogus... by seydor on Friday June 09, 2023 @11:18AM (#36259135)
notOpenAI told them that this is so incomprehensibly smart that it will destroy all of us. Not because it's dumb and connects the wrong cables, but because it's super-smart. People can't surmise from that that the model just makes stuff up on the way
Re:Lawyers blame ChatGPT for tricking them into citing bogus... by IIAOPSW on Friday June 09, 2023 @11:24AM (#36259240)
I prefer to use the term "clopenAI"
Re:Lawyers blame ChatGPT for tricking them into citing bogus... by SilasX on Friday June 09, 2023 @03:32PM (#36262925)
Re:Lawyers blame ChatGPT for tricking them into citing bogus... by JohnPrine on Friday June 09, 2023 @02:55PM (#36262381)
OpenAI is clear about the fact that ChatGPT can hallucinate, where have they ever said otherwise?
Re:Lawyers blame ChatGPT for tricking them into citing bogus... by arbitrarian on Friday June 09, 2023 @05:11PM (#36264214)
This is what I don't get. Not only have they not said otherwise, but they put it right up front in a pretty easy to understand brief message before you start using it. I guess lawyers just click agree without reading too.
Re:Lawyers blame ChatGPT for tricking them into citing bogus... by jprete on Friday June 09, 2023 @05:32PM (#36264425)
People are accustomed to ignoring the fine print as legal CYA with no real-world relevance. This is also why the product warnings that "The State of California considers this to cause cancer" are a joke and not a useful message.
Re:Lawyers blame ChatGPT for tricking them into citing bogus... by Too on Saturday June 10, 2023 @03:34AM (#36268487)
It’s not even fine print, there is a big Limitations section almost at the top of the chatgpt landing page with this as first bullet:

”ChatGPT sometimes writes plausible-sounding but incorrect or nonsensical answers.”

It does admittedly sound innocent, it should be written with a more scary tone on to how big extent it bullshits, not just “sometimes”. Still doesn’t excuse the incompetence of the lawyer in question.

Re:Lawyers blame ChatGPT for tricking them into citing bogus... by seydor on Friday June 09, 2023 @05:14PM (#36264247)
One of the most widely circulated PR about GPT4 is that it passed the bar exam

https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoetsier/2023/03/14/gpt-4-b...

and it's had the most vocal and sensational PR about how AI needs regulation now

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/09/tech/korea-altman-chatgpt...

People assume the smalltext does not apply to them.

openAI does not get a lot of flak from the media for the amount of BS that chatGPT can blurt out

Does anyone remember what happened to Galactica which did the same thing ? That too was clearly labeled as hallucinatory . But it was shut down because they did not BS the media enough about regulations and such.

I m afraid these LLMs are turning into too much of a political game to be useful for much longer.

On the other hand, if they become political, then people will be even more incentivized to build offline, local LLMs