this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2025
2 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

69449 readers
3995 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

But the explanation and Ramirez’s promise to educate himself on the use of AI wasn’t enough, and the judge chided him for not doing his research before filing. “It is abundantly clear that Mr. Ramirez did not make the requisite reasonable inquiry into the law. Had he expended even minimal effort to do so, he would have discovered that the AI-generated cases do not exist. That the AI-generated excerpts appeared valid to Mr. Ramirez does not relieve him of his duty to conduct a reasonable inquiry,” Judge Dinsmore continued, before recommending that Ramirez be sanctioned for $15,000.

Falling victim to this a year or more after the first guy made headlines for the same is just stupidity.

top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

“Mr. Ramirez explained that he had used AI before to assist with legal matters, such as drafting agreements, and did not know that AI was capable of generating fictitious cases and citations,” Judge Dinsmore wrote in court documents filed last week.

Jesus Christ, y'all. It's like Boomers trying to figure out the internet all over again. Just because AI (probably) can't lie doesn't mean it can't be earnestly wrong. It's not some magical fact machine; it's fancy predictive text.

It will be a truly scary time if people like Ramirez become judges one day and have forgotten how or why it's important to check people's sources yourself, robot or not.

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

No probably about it, it definitely can't lie. Lying requires knowledge and intent, and GPTs are just text generators that have neither.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I hate people can even try to blame AI.

If I typo a couple extra zeroes because my laptop sucks, that doesn't mean I didn't fuck up. I fucked up because of a tool I was using, but I was still the human using that tool.

This is no different.

If a lawyer submits something to court that is fraudulent I don't give a shit if he wrote it on a notepad or told the AI on his phone browser to do it.

He submitted it.

Start yanking law licenses and these lawyers will start re-evaluating if AI means they can fire all their human assistants and take on even more cases.

Stop acting like this shit is autonomous tools that strip responsibility from decisions, that's literally how Elmo is about to literally dismantle our federal government.

And they're 100% gonna blame the AI too.

I'm honestly surprised they haven't claimed DOGE is run by AI yet

[–] _haha_oh_wow_@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Haven't people already been disbarred over this? Turning in unvetted AI slop should get you fired from any job.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago

I heard turning in AI Slop worked out pretty well for Arcane Season 2 writers.