“Business, numbers, money, people”
By 
Courtesy of commentarian truffautfan: Professors who teach legal ethics have a new case for next year’s lesson plan.
ChatGPT has seen its popularity rise in recent months as optimism and skepticism about the new generative AI program soars.
However, the tool is at the heart of a case to discipline a New York lawyer. Steven Schwartz, a personal injury lawyer with Levidow, Levidow & Oberman, faces a sanctions hearing on June 8, after it was revealed that he used ChatGPT to write up an affidavit.
ChatGPT helpfully made up six cases, complete with made up quotes and internal citations and now Schwartz, another attorney and their employer are facing sanctions because the court system frowns on fabricated filings.
Schwartz’s excuse for this easily avoidable fuck up? He didn’t know computer programs could make mistakes.
On Thursday, Schwartz apologized to Castel, adding that he had never used the AI tool before and was unaware of the possibility that its content could be false,” the Times reported.
In a hilarious attempt to defend himself, Schwartz submitted screen caps that showed he fact-checked the AI program … by asking the same AI program if it had made up any of the cases. It said it hadn’t made up any of the cases, ergo some Latin words that mean seeing is believing.
How does this attorney get through a single day without buying at least one bridge and a few acres of future beachfront property in Nevada? Maybe the wallet inspectors get to him first.
Shwartz [sic] also added that ChatGPT was “a source that has revealed itself to be unreliable.”
I don’t think the program is the problem here.
But I do wish I could have overheard that conversation with the client.
People who post off-topic comments here rather than in the open thread use Donald tRump’s discarded TwitterBots to write their comments.
