Chat GPT AI
- Thread starter Sanrith Descartes
- Start date
Gutterflesh
Parody Account
- 7,664
- 39,345
Three Samsung employees reportedly leaked sensitive data to ChatGPT
Be careful what information you give to chatbots, folks.
www.engadget.com
Sanrith Descartes
Veteran of a thousand threadban wars
- 41,513
- 107,577
There is a link between your post and the Mist post above it. Can't fix stupid.View attachment 469907
Three Samsung employees reportedly leaked sensitive data to ChatGPT
Be careful what information you give to chatbots, folks.
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 45,445
- 73,513
Gotta take brass balls to actually live that as a small business owner and law layman. Imagine generating chatgpt legal documents, selling a tenants stuff to save a few hundred $$$ and then getting sued for tens of thousands in because the tenant had a world-class Pinky and the Brain memorabilia collection, and the judge asks wtf you got these legal documents from because they are nonsense
Sanrith Descartes
Veteran of a thousand threadban wars
- 41,513
- 107,577
Except the generated documents aren't nonsense. They aren't perfect though, either. What they really do is provide a sound foundation for things like memos, briefs and simple contracts. They are time savers, but not replacements... yet.
Aldarion
Egg Nazi
- 8,947
- 24,471
Are they really any worse than having your paralegal write up a first draft?
In science writing, its useless as a final draft, but its a better first draft than most grad students produce. In some ways. Worse in others.
My point is just that using it as one part of the process is less risky... I'd guess it takes a lawyer less time to proofread and correct it, than it does to write a new one from scratch.
In science writing, its useless as a final draft, but its a better first draft than most grad students produce. In some ways. Worse in others.
My point is just that using it as one part of the process is less risky... I'd guess it takes a lawyer less time to proofread and correct it, than it does to write a new one from scratch.
- 2
Sanrith Descartes
Veteran of a thousand threadban wars
- 41,513
- 107,577
Im not a lawyer, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express this week and to my eyes this doesnt look like a bad starting point. If GPT can shave hours of research time off a paralegal then its a legitimate tool that will only get better.
Under florida law, write a 3 paragraph legal memo on the unenforceability of traffic light cameras citing 3 court cases.
To: [Client/Supervisor] From: ChatGPT Subject: Unenforceability of Traffic Light Cameras in Florida
Florida traffic light cameras have been a topic of discussion in the legal world, particularly in regards to their enforceability. While some states have successfully implemented traffic light cameras, their legality has been challenged in Florida. This memo will examine the unenforceability of traffic light cameras in Florida by analyzing three court cases.
Firstly, the Florida Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of red light cameras in the case of Jimenez v. State. In 2010, the court held that the use of traffic light cameras did not violate due process, but the fines imposed as a result of the cameras did. The court found that the fines exceeded the limits of administrative penalties and were therefore unconstitutional. This decision rendered the use of red light cameras in Florida largely unenforceable until the legislature addressed the issue.
Secondly, the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeals ruled in the case of Ortiz v. State that traffic light cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the right to confront one's accuser. In this case, the defendant was not able to cross-examine the camera or the operator, which deprived him of his Sixth Amendment right. The court held that the use of the camera violated the defendant's constitutional rights and could not be enforced.
Finally, the Florida Third District Court of Appeals addressed the issue of red light cameras in the case of Markwardt v. City of Miami. In this case, the court held that the city did not have the authority to enact an ordinance permitting the use of red light cameras, as this was a matter of statewide concern that should have been addressed by the legislature. The court found that the ordinance was preempted by state law, making the use of the cameras unenforceable in that particular jurisdiction.
In conclusion, the unenforceability of traffic light cameras in Florida has been established through a number of court cases. The use of these cameras has been found to violate due process, the right to confront one's accuser, and the preemption of state law. As a result, it is important for individuals who receive tickets as a result of traffic light cameras to consult with an attorney to understand their legal options.
Under florida law, write a 3 paragraph legal memo on the unenforceability of traffic light cameras citing 3 court cases.
To: [Client/Supervisor] From: ChatGPT Subject: Unenforceability of Traffic Light Cameras in Florida
Florida traffic light cameras have been a topic of discussion in the legal world, particularly in regards to their enforceability. While some states have successfully implemented traffic light cameras, their legality has been challenged in Florida. This memo will examine the unenforceability of traffic light cameras in Florida by analyzing three court cases.
Firstly, the Florida Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of red light cameras in the case of Jimenez v. State. In 2010, the court held that the use of traffic light cameras did not violate due process, but the fines imposed as a result of the cameras did. The court found that the fines exceeded the limits of administrative penalties and were therefore unconstitutional. This decision rendered the use of red light cameras in Florida largely unenforceable until the legislature addressed the issue.
Secondly, the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeals ruled in the case of Ortiz v. State that traffic light cameras are unconstitutional because they violate the right to confront one's accuser. In this case, the defendant was not able to cross-examine the camera or the operator, which deprived him of his Sixth Amendment right. The court held that the use of the camera violated the defendant's constitutional rights and could not be enforced.
Finally, the Florida Third District Court of Appeals addressed the issue of red light cameras in the case of Markwardt v. City of Miami. In this case, the court held that the city did not have the authority to enact an ordinance permitting the use of red light cameras, as this was a matter of statewide concern that should have been addressed by the legislature. The court found that the ordinance was preempted by state law, making the use of the cameras unenforceable in that particular jurisdiction.
In conclusion, the unenforceability of traffic light cameras in Florida has been established through a number of court cases. The use of these cameras has been found to violate due process, the right to confront one's accuser, and the preemption of state law. As a result, it is important for individuals who receive tickets as a result of traffic light cameras to consult with an attorney to understand their legal options.
It's almost certainly easier to correct factual errors than to wordsmith something written by your grad student who is only half literate in English.
I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express, but none of those case citations is real.
Aldarion
Egg Nazi
- 8,947
- 24,471
Yeah. ChatGPT writes way better, its not even a competition. It just doesnt know anything, so it writes fluff.
Still, correctly written fluff is not a bad starting point. Its arguably a better starting point than badly written poorly formulated thoughts with a couple accurate references included.
It does that shit with science writing too, completely fictitious studies. If you ask it to include links or a bibliography it makes up titles and links to random unrelated studies. With all that -- I think I would still prefer to proofread and correct a chatGPT product than a graduate student paper, let alone an undergraduate essay.
Still, correctly written fluff is not a bad starting point. Its arguably a better starting point than badly written poorly formulated thoughts with a couple accurate references included.
It does that shit with science writing too, completely fictitious studies. If you ask it to include links or a bibliography it makes up titles and links to random unrelated studies. With all that -- I think I would still prefer to proofread and correct a chatGPT product than a graduate student paper, let alone an undergraduate essay.
Sanrith Descartes
Veteran of a thousand threadban wars
- 41,513
- 107,577
Yes. This isn't enough information to identify cases. Typically you'd have case numbers, year, etc. To the extent that "Generic Name vs State" returns anything to do with Florida they seem to be drug cases.
How to cite a court case in APA Style
Legal citations (e.g. court cases, laws) in APA Style look somewhat different from other APA citations. They generally don’t list authors, and
www.scribbr.com
Sanrith Descartes
Veteran of a thousand threadban wars
- 41,513
- 107,577
Thats good comedy.Yes. This isn't enough information to identify cases. Typically you'd have case numbers and years. To the extent that "Generic Name vs State" returns anything to do with Florida they seem to be drug cases.
How to cite a court case in APA Style
Legal citations (e.g. court cases, laws) in APA Style look somewhat different from other APA citations. They generally don’t list authors, and
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 45,445
- 73,513
Yeah but if you're a layman, double checking stuff may be beyond you.
In this case it got the # wrong I think. I don't have the legal knowledge to say it got the rest of it correct, but trust the tweets that say it was close enough.
Colorado Revised Statutes | Article 21.5 - SELF-SERVICE STORAGE FACILITY LIENS | Casetext is the statute
I'm just saying that even though they serve as a starting point or foundation, it's difficult as a layman to build on that foundation and find corrections and have enough trust in it to take an action that could introduce legal risk like selling a tenant's possessions. There's no backing from a lawyer firm who would share some level of liability if it was contested, just you with some dumbass ChatGPT responses you don't understand.
This, of course, isn't anything new. Laymen have been looking shit up and overreaching forever. ChatGPT is just a version that makes it very convenient to overreach because it produces very clean, official looking documents without any underlying recommendation to talk to someone who knows better.
- 1
Tuco
I got Tuco'd!
- 45,445
- 73,513
Yeah. I stressed it a bit a few weeks ago about something I was working on related to suspension dynamics in vehicles. At a surface level it described things just fine, but when I started getting into details it just started making up bullshit soft-body physics word-salads that would be completely plausible to a non-expert.
It reminded me of the flat-earth proofs either done by physicists who were taking the piss or non-physicists regurgitating the physicists writing. Just injecting random horse-shit about how bodies of water refracts sunlight, which is why sailboats descend beyond the horizon.
Though the bar for legal malpractice is pretty high. Set by lawyers, oddly enough.
Sanrith Descartes
Veteran of a thousand threadban wars
- 41,513
- 107,577
