Lawyers who cited fake cases hallucinated by ChatGPT must pay

theregister.com

4 pointsLinuxBender3 comments

> "The lesson here is that you can't delegate to a machine the things for which a lawyer is responsible," said Stephen Wu

Just shows that hallucinating AI snake oil as a service producing unchecked bullshit is indeed useless for very high risk industries like I said before. [0] In this case, it is even worse, since these legal experts already checked it and accepted the output.

So it looks like you still need humans to do even more checking, given the high likelihood of LLMs like ChatGPT hallucinating all over the place.

Absolutely unsurprising. [0]

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36091468

It would take 2 minutes to check on Nexus Lexis to see if these were real cases. Lazy.

From the Sanctions Order: "The Levidow Firm primarily practices in New York state courts. It uses a legal research service called Fastcase and does not maintain Westlaw or LexisNexis accounts. When Mr. Schwartz began to research the Montreal Convention, the firm’s Fastcase account had limited access to federal cases."

And isn't that as big a story? That in 2023, in the richest country in the world, there's no publicly searchable index of the laws of the country?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com