Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, pacman said:

https://buttondown.com/maiht3k/archive/openai-tries-to-shift-responsibility-to-users/

 

It's not our fault we rolled out a shit product way too soon and then over hyped it to push adoption.

 

It's the users fault 

I am not sure I disagree with the subtitle of the article.  


“ChatGPT gave you bad medical advice? That’s on you.”

How much responsibility should a company have to bear for the stupidity of its customers?  I guess each session could start with a warning label?

“I am a system designed to provide statistically relevant answers based on your questions given the internet and public domain as my primary source of knowledge.  My answers are only as valid as the information I was trained on, which may be wrong.  I am not a physician, not a lawyer, not a financial advisor, not a psychologist, not a spiritual or religious advisor and definitely not a human with empathy, morality or ethics to guide my responses.  Use me at your own risk.”

But writing that just makes me sad that there are enough people out there who are stupid enough to make it necessary.

 

Edited by Goredho
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, Goredho said:

But writing that just makes me sad that there are enough people out there who are stupid enough to make it necessary.

Ticking over Ye Olde 50 Years Old threshold and the amount of "the Texas legislature has voted on new healthcare legislation bleh bleh bleh and Medicare or Medicaid bleh bleh bleh" spam robo calls has shot up for me, even with constantly blocking.

Somebody out there is making a shitload of money on these spam robo calls, and even though I clearly recognize them as spam robocalls, it's obvious a lot of people aren't.

Now ramp that up to 11 with AI with a lot more stuff. We are in for a rough ride.

I used to chuckle at the once-in-a-blue-moon phone call from a relative asking why somebody in another country wants to send them cash.  Now I'm pretty sure half my older relatives have had a few thousand dollars stolen from them over this stuff.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
44 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Ticking over Ye Olde 50 Years Old threshold and the amount of "the Texas legislature has voted on new healthcare legislation bleh bleh bleh and Medicare or Medicaid bleh bleh bleh" spam robo calls has shot up for me, even with constantly blocking.

Somebody out there is making a shitload of money on these spam robo calls, and even though I clearly recognize them as spam robocalls, it's obvious a lot of people aren't.

Now ramp that up to 11 with AI with a lot more stuff. We are in for a rough ride.

I used to chuckle at the once-in-a-blue-moon phone call from a relative asking why somebody in another country wants to send them cash.  Now I'm pretty sure half my older relatives have had a few thousand dollars stolen from them over this stuff.

We are literally building ON PURPOSE an economy that has "scams and grift" as one of its central pillars.  It's gone beyond "look, any time you have transactions and trade, there will be scammers operating on the margins" to "it's a material element of our economy, responsible for a sizable percentage of the money traded every day."  It's not just amazing to watch it happen, it's super-amazing to watch our policy makers go all-in on supporting, encouraging, and (most importantly) joining in on it.

TLDR: in this new economy, if you aren't ripping people off/grifting, what are you even doing?

Posted (edited)

Westlaw legal research now has an AI assisted aspect.  So I asked a legal question the other day, and it gave me an answer that was absolutely wrong and guided by a Supreme Court decision in our state that had been specificallylegislatively overturned.

So I told the AI “ you dumb fuck, a statute overturned that decision”.   It then gave an answer that was directly opposite from the answer it gave me five minutes before.  

Even though there’s a disclaimer saying, “don’t rely on what I told you”, there has to be a vast army of dumb shits who won’t do that and will submit briefs full of nonsense.  As it is, people have submitted briefs where AI completely fabricated case cites  and holdings.  I mean, it made up legal shit that never existed.   We know this because judges have been sanctioning the shit out of lawyers for using AI and not checking.   

For a society that has already pretty much abandoned critical thinking, AI should be the nail in the coffin on that issue

 

Edited by Gatorubet
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Gatorubet said:

Westlaw legal research now has an AI assisted aspect.  So I asked a legal question the other day, and it gave me an answer that was absolutely wrong and guided by a Supreme Court decision in our state that had been specificallylegislatively overturned.

So I told the AI “ you dumb fuck, a statute overturned that decision”.   It then gave an answer that was directly opposite from the answer it gave me five minutes before.  

Even though there’s a disclaimer saying, “don’t rely on what I told you”, there has to be a vast army of dumb shits who won’t do that and will submit briefs full of nonsense.  As it is, people have submitted briefs where AI completely fabricated case cites  and holdings.  I mean, it made up legal shit that never existed.   We know this because judges have been sanctioning the shit out of lawyers for using AI and not checking.   

For a society that has already pretty much abandoned critical thinking, AI should be the nail in the coffin on that issue

 

This is a huge problem for me as well. I have junior staff doing code research (building, fire, ADA, zoning etc.) and they invariably rely on AI to do this. Nearly daily it returns incorrect answers similar to what you got - wrong code, section was revised, etc. Although I require staff to return the actual code cite language and section reference to me, a lot of them just want to take the AI result as gospel. The last search I did, for a building code reference in a WA state suburb, current (2021) code, returned a reference to the 2009 Santa Clara CA building code. When I showed it to staff, they started to get it - I hope....

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...