\nIs ChatGPT the ultimate homework cheat?<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n
While often impressive, generative AI like OpenAI’s\u00a0ChatGPT<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Google’s Bard<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0have\u00a0a tendency to “hallucinate” when giving answers<\/strong><\/a>, as it may not have a true understanding of the information it has been fed.<\/p>\n One of the\u00a0concerns raised by those worried about the potential of AI<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0regards the spread of disinformation.<\/p>\n Asked by Sky News whether it should be used to help write a legal brief, ChatGPT itself wrote: “While I can provide general information and assistance, it is important to note I am an AI language model and not a qualified legal professional.”<\/p>\n Judge Castel said there is “inherently improper” in lawyers using AI “for assistance”, but warned they have a responsibility to ensure their filings are accurate.<\/p>\n He said the lawyers had “continued to stand by the fake opinions” after the court and airline had questioned them.<\/p>\n Schwartz, LoDuca and their law firm were ordered to pay a total fine of $5,000 (\u00a33,926).<\/p>\n Levidow, Levidow & Oberman is considering whether to appeal, saying they “made a good faith mistake in failing to believe that a piece of technology could be making up cases out of whole cloth”.<\/p>\n Source: \u00a0![\"Sky](\"http:\/\/worldjusticenews.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/sky-news-logo-1.png\"){kind=logo}
<\/a> news.sky.com<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"