Suspecting court of using AI, man injected prompts in filings to try to win case

tentacleuno

What are the opinions of those here on using AI for court rulings? To me, it seems truly frightening that a Silicon Valley company could be placed in such a direct position of trust and influence over the legal system. There are examples of AI acting in its own self-interest over the wants of its masters, so I do wonder how it would handle cases against its respective company, or things which would directly impact it. Outside of that, I still worry about its impartiality and its overall correctness. It makes me feel very uneasy.

ktallett

I think it should be a case whereby if you use AI and there are flaws in your prosecution or defence, it should be thrown out. This is another situation whereby nuance is not handled by AI.

spwa4

... did he win?

soupspaces

Earlier https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49290521

ruckcbek

I put this stuff in my resume.

pcrh

I wonder how the court became aware of this attempt? It might be as simple as a clerk doing "select all" and noticing the extra selection? Or what else?

RobotToaster

> Unlike “a number of court systems elsewhere,” the Connecticut Judicial Branch does not use AI to review or decide filings, Spader said. >in Elliott’s case, prompts were “exposed, in each of those settings, the moment a human being actually looked at what the machine produced,” Spader said. Well that's a contradiction.

ChrisArchitect

[dupe] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49290521