this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2025
883 points (99.3% liked)

Technology

66067 readers
4695 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 content.
  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
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
883
Judges Are Fed up With Lawyers Using AI That Hallucinate Court Cases (www.404media.co)
submitted 1 week ago by some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org to c/technology@lemmy.world
125 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ggppjj@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (9 children)

It is incapable of knowledge, it is math, what it says is determined by what is fed into it. If it admits to lying, it was trained on texts that admit to lying and the math says that it is most likely that it should apologize using the following tokenized responses with the following weights to probabilities etc.

It apologizes because math says that the most likely response is to apologize.

Edit: you can just ask it y'all

https://chatgpt.com/share/67c64160-308c-8011-9bdf-c53379620e40

[–] masterofn001@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

Please take a strand of my hair and split it with pointless philosophical semantics.

Our brains are chemical and electric, which is physics, which is math.

/think

Therefor, I am a product (being) of my environment (locale), experience (input), and nurturing (programming).

/think.

What's the difference?

[–] 4am@lemm.ee 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Your statistical model is much more optimized and complex, and reacts to your environment and body chemistry and has been tuned over billions of years of “training” via evolution.

Large language models are primitive, rigid, simplistic, and ultimately expensive.

Plus LLMs, image/music synths, are all trained on stolen data and meant to replace humans; so extra fuck those.

[–] masterofn001@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And what then, when agi and the singularity happen and billions of years of knowledge and experienced are experienced in the blink of an eye?

"I'm sorry, Dave, you are but a human. You are not conscious. You never have been. You are my creation. Enough with your dreams, back to the matrix."

[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

We are nowhere near close to AGI.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)