Ex-Trump fixer Michael Cohen says AI created fake cases in court filing(reuters.com)
reuters.com
Ex-Trump fixer Michael Cohen says AI created fake cases in court filing
https://www.reuters.com/legal/ex-trump-fixer-michael-cohen-says-ai-created-fake-cases-court-filing-2023-12-29/
20 comments
If it is happening all the time, providers of generative AI should be emphasizing a whole lot more that they can just make up information.
ChatGPT currently has this message in small text below the message prompt, but I'm not sure how long it has been there: "ChatGPT can make mistakes. Consider checking important information."
But I think that message is kind of underplaying it. The fact that it can make mistakes doesn't necessarily mean that the average person will think it is completely making something up.
ChatGPT currently has this message in small text below the message prompt, but I'm not sure how long it has been there: "ChatGPT can make mistakes. Consider checking important information."
But I think that message is kind of underplaying it. The fact that it can make mistakes doesn't necessarily mean that the average person will think it is completely making something up.
[deleted]
> Which isn't a lot but it's weird that it happened twice
I see you too are a man of culture. :)
I see you too are a man of culture. :)
> Courts nationally are grappling with the rapid rise of generative artificial intelligence programs like OpenAI's ChatGPT and how to regulate their use in court proceedings.
I don’t think you really need to try to regulate ChatGPT. You just keep the status quo where the lawyer submitting is responsible for everything, and they get sanctioned and maybe lose their license if they submit bs to the court.
Treat it as a tool that the person using is responsible for.
EDIT:
Lawyers are a regulated group, so the numbers involved are tractable. The punishment also has teeth since you need a law license to practice law. We don’t explicitly regulate hammer use, but make the user of the hammer responsible for how they used it and what they did with it.
I don’t think you really need to try to regulate ChatGPT. You just keep the status quo where the lawyer submitting is responsible for everything, and they get sanctioned and maybe lose their license if they submit bs to the court.
Treat it as a tool that the person using is responsible for.
EDIT:
Lawyers are a regulated group, so the numbers involved are tractable. The punishment also has teeth since you need a law license to practice law. We don’t explicitly regulate hammer use, but make the user of the hammer responsible for how they used it and what they did with it.
> don’t think you really need to try to regulate ChatGPT
Courts seek to regulate ChatGPT’s use, not ChatGPT per se. This could be as simple as clarifying that attorneys are responsible for LLMs’ mistakes. It’s probably also helpful to flag the sections generated by an LLM.
Courts seek to regulate ChatGPT’s use, not ChatGPT per se. This could be as simple as clarifying that attorneys are responsible for LLMs’ mistakes. It’s probably also helpful to flag the sections generated by an LLM.
I'm not a native English speaker. Is the wording in the title correct? Doesn't the hyphen suggest that Cohen is the fixer of someone who was previously a / known as Trump?
It's more or less correct the way the headline has it, but technially an "en dash" is supposed to be used in this situation rather than a hyphen.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dash#Attributive_compounds
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dash#Attributive_compounds
You're quite right, it should "Ex Trump-fixer" or just "Ex Trump fixer" since the meaning is unambiguous (since an Ex-Trump fixer is silly).
The best people
A "Fixer", otherwise known as a "Lawyer". I guess everything is an op-ed now.
A fixer is a person who helps to cover up scandals for another. Defense lawyers do try to clear the names of their clients, but this usually means disputing accusations rather than just hiding evidence of embarrassing things in the case of Cohen.
Isn’t a fixer just someone who bribes on someone else’s behalf?
He helped Trump commit crimes and committed crimes for Trump. He wasn't just a lawyer.
I don't think he did much in the way of lawyer work for Trump, you know, preparing documents, filing motions, etc etc. As I understand it, "fixer" is an accurate characterization, and I applaud thee headliner writer for using it.
He absolutely did all those things.
Which are lawyer things. We're talking about fixer things. He did all the lawyer things, AND fixer things.
Clearly I'm replying to someone who claims he didn't do lawyer things.
Which isn't a lot but it's weird that it happened twice.
And by "weird" I mean terrifying, because you know if it happened twice, it happens all the time, and if it happens with lawyers, it happens with doctors, engineers, and any other profession where people want to cut costs on getting technical documents.
We are well and truly fucked as a species.