• Australis13@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    5 months ago

    LLMs are being shoved into so many bits of software (office suites, programming tools, etc.) it doesn’t surprise me that something like this has happened.

    • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Law people have a duty to be up to date on this stuff tho. If you dont know how to avoid LLMs from seeing or interacting with your stuff then you shouldnt be allowed to practice law.

      • tabular@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        To really be sure would require knowing what software is actually doing - not just taking the claims made by the programmers (or more likely, the mere owners) of the proprietary software.

        That sounds doubly difficult job.

        • Joe@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          5 months ago

          Judges usually don’t know this stuff, but they primarily work with systems and software supplied by the state…whose experts should know what they are doing.

          My bet is that this guy decided to work on personal equipment, probably in violation of the rules. Being a judge, he’s unlikely to be sanctioned for it, and will certainly learn from the experience. If anything, there may be some internal discussions which we’ll never hear about.

          Law is an area where AI can add value, though… searching through past rulings and legal opinions is tedious, and anything that can assist to find needles in haystacks would be welcome. It shouldn’t be used to write legal judgements or arguments though…