Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DoNotPay has to pay $193K for falsely touting untested AI lawyer, FTC says

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 218 posts

Re: DoNotPay has to pay $193K for falsely touting untested AI lawyer, FTC says

#81

Post by everforward »

ahmeneeroe-v2 wrote: post #63
ziddoap wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure about the history, I based my comment on this quote from the article: > [...] DoNotPay's legal service [...] relying on an API with OpenAI's ChatGPT. Perhaps they rolled their own chatbot then later switched to ChatGPT? Either way, they probably should have a lawyer involved at some point in the process.

Yes I think you are right about that. Someone else called it "mad libs" and that is very much what it felt like back in 2017/18. Idk why they needed to have a lawyer involved though. Many processes in life just need an "official" sounding response: to get to the next phase, or open the gate to talk to a real human, or even to close the issue with a positive result. Many people are not able to conjure up an "official"…

"Lawyer" is a regulated term that comes with a lot of expectations of the "lawyer" (liability for malpractice, a bunch of duties, etc). You can't just say that something is a lawyer any more than you could do the same with doctors or police officers.

Machines are also not allowed to be the "author" of court documents if they actually get to court (so far as I'm aware). A lawyer has to sign off and claim it as their own work, and doing so without the lawyer reading it is pretty taboo (I think maybe sanctionable by the BAR but I could be wrong).

Re: DoNotPay has to pay $193K for falsely touting untested AI lawyer, FTC says

#82

Post by LegitShady »

zahlman wrote: post #72
Aurornis wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it used to be pretty positively received on HN I think people love the idea of DoNotPay: A magical internet machine that saves people money and fights back against evil corporations. Before ChatGPT they were basically mad libs for finding and filling out the right form. Helpful for people who couldn't figure out how to navigate situations by themselves. There is real value in this. However, they've also been runnin…

>they're just another startup playing the growth hacking game When is humanity going to start seeing some patches against these exploits? Is common sense still in beta?

when the government regulates it. until then it will continue to the end of time.

Re: DoNotPay has to pay $193K for falsely touting untested AI lawyer, FTC says

#83

Post by thrance »

whatshisface wrote: post #56
Aurornis wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it used to be pretty positively received on HN I think people love the idea of DoNotPay: A magical internet machine that saves people money and fights back against evil corporations. Before ChatGPT they were basically mad libs for finding and filling out the right form. Helpful for people who couldn't figure out how to navigate situations by themselves. There is real value in this. However, they've also been runnin…

There's altruism, running a business, and unrestrained avarice. Sometimes libertarians can be as prone to equating the first two as leftists are the latter.

In your world, it seems the leftists have it figured out. The purpose of a business is always to maximize profit.

EDIT: yeah, yeah, I hear you. You can survive on VC money, and maximize share price instead of focusing on profit. You can also be a small business owned by good people just trying to make a living, but then you still have to not get drowned out by more ruthless competition. The purpose of a business is not always to maximize profit.

Re: DoNotPay has to pay $193K for falsely touting untested AI lawyer, FTC says

#84

Post by glial »

zahlman wrote: post #72
Aurornis wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it used to be pretty positively received on HN I think people love the idea of DoNotPay: A magical internet machine that saves people money and fights back against evil corporations. Before ChatGPT they were basically mad libs for finding and filling out the right form. Helpful for people who couldn't figure out how to navigate situations by themselves. There is real value in this. However, they've also been runnin…

>they're just another startup playing the growth hacking game When is humanity going to start seeing some patches against these exploits? Is common sense still in beta?

Ideally the legal system wouldn't be byzantine and prohibitively expensive for mere mortals to engage with.

Re: DoNotPay has to pay $193K for falsely touting untested AI lawyer, FTC says

#85

Post by woah »

raverbashing wrote: post #31
gradyfps wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair if legal paperwork follows a standard process with standard information, a "robot" can complete many orders of magnitude more than any human lawyer. (I'm also not a lawyer and have no idea if this line of thinking is applicable.)

Honestly most lawyers (that I know at least) just keep templates of most common documents and fill in the blanks as needed For basic stuff this is 95% of the end product

And 95% of a doctor's job is just saying "your checkup looks OK Joe, just try to get some exercise and eat more fiber".

Re: DoNotPay has to pay $193K for falsely touting untested AI lawyer, FTC says

#88

Post by ziddoap »

pb7 wrote: post #79
ziddoap wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Did they help regular people defend themselves while saving on legal costs or not? Do you get a free pass to do shitty things as long as you do some good things too? I am totally onboard with the concept of the business, just not this particular implementation of it.

That's a little bit how the law works. If you get sentenced for a conviction, your good deeds will affect the decision. Sometimes people get off entirely based on who they are (e.g. athletes, execs, etc).

>If you get sentenced for a conviction, your good deeds will affect the decision.

Definitely a valid point, but I don't feel comfortable applying the same idea to inanimate entities like corporations.

>Sometimes people get off entirely based on who they are (e.g. athletes, execs, etc).

On a personal level, I have never agreed with this.

Re: DoNotPay has to pay $193K for falsely touting untested AI lawyer, FTC says

#89

Post by dpassens »

thrance wrote: post #83
whatshisface wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's altruism, running a business, and unrestrained avarice. Sometimes libertarians can be as prone to equating the first two as leftists are the latter.

In your world, it seems the leftists have it figured out. The purpose of a business is always to maximize profit. EDIT: yeah, yeah, I hear you. You can survive on VC money, and maximize share price instead of focusing on profit. You can also be a small business owned by good people just trying to make a living, but then you still have to not get drowned out by more ruthless competition. The purpose of a business is n…

The purpose of a business is whatever its owners want it to be. Typically, this is maximizing profit, but it could be anything, like getting paid for what you like to do.

Re: DoNotPay has to pay $193K for falsely touting untested AI lawyer, FTC says

#90

Post by lexicality »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #69
ziddoap wrote: post #4

> DoNotPay also did not "hire or retain any attorneys" to help verify AI outputs or validate DoNotPay's legal claims. Wow, that's brave. Create a wrapper around ChatGPT, call it a lawyer, and never check the output. $193k fine seems like peanuts. Sometimes I think about where I would be in life if I had no moral or ethical qualms. I'd probably be running a company like this.

Is "brave" a euphemism for stupid.

I can think of very few situations where someone would say "wow that's brave" and not mean "wow you're an idiot"
Post reply on HN