Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. > Law firm Pinsent Masons and three solicitors referred to SRA after 'astonishing' AI failures where court misled by hallucinations

> Law firm Pinsent Masons and three solicitors referred to SRA after 'astonishing' AI failures where court misled by hallucinations

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
22 Indlæg 11 Posters 16 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • noodlemaz@mstdn.gamesN noodlemaz@mstdn.games

    @neil @jackeric I am shockened and will follow up with lawyer friend 😅

    neil@mastodon.neilzone.co.ukN This user is from outside of this forum
    neil@mastodon.neilzone.co.ukN This user is from outside of this forum
    neil@mastodon.neilzone.co.uk
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #21

    @noodlemaz @jackeric

    It is not something that I need to do, but my recollection is that it is "and" in civil proceedings", and "against" in criminal proceedings.

    So "R. v. Brown" would be "The Crown against Brown", but "Neil v. Nicola" would be "Neil and Nicola".

    I am not aware that one ever says "versus" or "v", but it is also possible that things have changed since I last needed to consider this.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • neil@mastodon.neilzone.co.ukN neil@mastodon.neilzone.co.uk

      > Law firm Pinsent Masons and three solicitors referred to SRA after 'astonishing' AI failures where court misled by hallucinations

      Repeatedly, it is alleged.

      All going well for AI and lawyers then.

      https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/pinsents-and-solicitors-referred-to-sra-over-astonishing-ai-failures/5126895.article

      jonnyt@mastodon.me.ukJ This user is from outside of this forum
      jonnyt@mastodon.me.ukJ This user is from outside of this forum
      jonnyt@mastodon.me.uk
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #22

      @neil "The court heard that LA started chatting with the firm’s AI following the judge’s query. Judge Mullen read these discussions and noted it was remarkable how, on a large number of occasions, the AI was ‘plainly wrong or, at the very least, extremely misleading’, with hallucinations beginning almost immediately."

      Big sigh because it isn't remotely remarkable. It's entirely to be expected. That anyone finds this 'remarkable' is what's actually remarkable about it.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • pelle@veganism.socialP pelle@veganism.social shared this topic
      Svar
      • Svar som emne
      Login for at svare
      • Ældste til nyeste
      • Nyeste til ældste
      • Most Votes


      • Log ind

      • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

      • Login or register to search.
      Powered by NodeBB Contributors
      Graciously hosted by data.coop
      • First post
        Last post
      0
      • Hjem
      • Seneste
      • Etiketter
      • Populære
      • Verden
      • Bruger
      • Grupper