Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

Ms. Toad

(38,188 posts)

13. Of course it's a thing. ChatGPT is designed to be conversational, not factual.

Reply to BumRushDaShow (Original post)

Fri May 23, 2025, 05:56 PM

May 2025

It knows the flow of a court document, and when the facts it needs aren't in it's training, it makes crap up - cases and all - in order to keep the conversation going.

It is up to the lawyer to verify everything in the brief - whether they prepared it, a law clerk, a legal assistant, or ChatGPT. Signing the document, and submitting it to court is your assertion as to the diligence and accuracy of the filing.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

15 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Judge considers sanctions against attorneys in prison case for using AI in court filings [View all] BumRushDaShow May 2025 OP

The key word is "considers" gab13by13 May 2025 #1

"Hallucinations" is the term to humanize AI errors. bucolic_frolic May 2025 #2

Hallucinations are very different than errors Jose Garcia May 2025 #9

Considering?! PJMcK May 2025 #3

AI isn't referenced in The Federal Rules of Evidence, is it? no_hypocrisy May 2025 #4

Judges sure like to waste time "considering" Balatro May 2025 #5

Lawyers have been disciplined for this too many times for Butler Snow to have any excuse. Eugene May 2025 #6

I love how they call these "hallucinations" BumRushDaShow May 2025 #7

I think they have told the judge to pound sand. republianmushroom May 2025 #8

No shock to me that this happened in Alabama. Baitball Blogger May 2025 #10

Calling it an "incorrect citation" is misleading fujiyamasan May 2025 #11

This is what happens when we still have ZERO federal regulation of this fucking shit. Karasu May 2025 #12

None are needed. Ms. Toad May 2025 #14

Of course it's a thing. ChatGPT is designed to be conversational, not factual. Ms. Toad May 2025 #13

The verification is the most important point about generative AI fujiyamasan May 2025 #15