3 Matching Annotations
  1. Jul 2023
    1. One federal judge in the Northern District of Texas issued a standing order in late May after Schwartz’s situation was in headlines that anyone appearing before the court must either attest that “no portion of any filing will be drafted by generative artificial intelligence” or flag any language that was drafted by AI to be checked for accuracy. He wrote that while these “platforms are incredibly powerful and have many uses in the law,” briefings are not one of them as the platforms are “prone to hallucinations and bias” in their current states.

      Seems like this judge has a strong bias against the use of AI. I think this broad ban is too broad and unfair. Maybe they should ban spell check and every other tool that could make mistakes too? Ultimately, the humans using the tool shoudl be the ones responsible for checking the generaetd draft for accuracy and the ones to hold responsible for any mistakes; they shouldn't simply be forbidden from using the tool.

    2. New York-based startup DoNotPay created an AI-based way for people to contest traffic tickets—a user would wear smart glasses that would feed it information to say in court generated by AI—but before the creator could introduce it in court, he said he got threats from multiple bar associations about “unauthorized practice of law,”
  2. May 2021
    1. If the hosting company (or any organization that you're trying to get support from) wanted you to know something, they would have already told you or made that information available.