Re:An analysis of DeepSeek's R1-Zero and R1
by jl6 on Wednesday January 29, 2025 @02:36PM
(#42870029)
$3.4K is about what you might pay a magic circle lawyer for an opinion on a matter. Not saying o3 is an efficient use of resources, just saying that it’s not outlandish that a sufficiently good AI could be worth that kind of money.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:An analysis of DeepSeek's R1-Zero and R1
by victorbjorklund on Wednesday January 29, 2025 @04:09PM
(#42871178)
You pay that price to a law firm to get good service and to get a "guarantee" of correctness. You get neither from an LLM. Not saying it is not worth anything but you cant compare it to a top law firm.
Re:An analysis of DeepSeek's R1-Zero and R1
by nl on Wednesday January 29, 2025 @08:57PM
(#42873893)
You absolutely do not get a "guarantee" of correctness (event with the airquotes) from any lawyer.
Re:An analysis of DeepSeek's R1-Zero and R1
by manquer on Thursday January 30, 2025 @06:38AM
(#42876897)
You can sue a lawyer giving certain kinds of bad advice and occasionally win . That is what the guarantee is about
Re:An analysis of DeepSeek's R1-Zero and R1
by bobxmax on Thursday January 30, 2025 @08:29AM
(#42877480)
You can probably sue Open AI for getting bad legal advice from ChatGPT too.
Re:An analysis of DeepSeek's R1-Zero and R1
by throw-qqqqq on Thursday January 30, 2025 @12:48PM
(#42880145)
Sure, but can you also win the case ;)?
On the bottom of ChatGPT.com I see a disclaimer: “ChatGPT can make mistakes. Check important info”.
I don’t think you can succesfully sue with such caveat emptor.