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

ChatGPT terms disallow its use in providing legal and medical advice to others

ctvnews.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 439 posts

Re: ChatGPT terms disallow its use in providing legal and medical advice to others

#141

Post by nh43215rgb »

simonw wrote: post #122
gcr wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is wrong. Others in this thread are noticing a change in ChatGPT's behavior for first-party medical advice.

But OpenAI's head of Health AI says that ChatGPT's behavior has not changed: https://xcancel.com/thekaransinghal/status/19854160578054965... and https://x.com/thekaransinghal/status/1985416057805496524 I trust what he says over general vibes. (If you think he's lying, what's your theory on WHY he would lie about a change like this?)

My theory is that he believes 1) people will trust him over what general public say, and 2) this kind of claim is hard to verify to prove him wrong.

Re: ChatGPT terms disallow its use in providing legal and medical advice to others

#142

Post by tamimio »

cpfohl wrote: post #3

Tricky…my son had a really rare congenital issue that no one could solve for a long time. After it was diagnosed I walked an older version of chat gpt through our experience and it suggested my son’s issue as a possibility along with the correct diagnostic tool in just one back and forth. I’m not saying we should be getting AI advice without a professional, but I’m my case it could have saved my kid a LOT of physical…

That's the experience of a lot of people I know or read their stories online, but it isn't about AI bad diagnosis, it's because they know in 5 years doctors and lawyers will be burger flippers, and as a result people won't be motivated to go into any of these fields. In Canada, the process to be a doctor is extremely complicated and hard only to keep it as some sort of private community that only the very few can become doctors, all to keep the wages abysmally high, and as a result, you end up waiting long times for appointments, and the doctors themselves are overwhelmed too. Messed up system that you better pray you never have to become its victim.

In my opinion, AI should do both legal and medical work, keep some humans for decision making, and the rest of the doctors to be surgeons instead.

Re: ChatGPT terms disallow its use in providing legal and medical advice to others

#143

Post by alphazard »

miki123211 wrote: post #12

> The AI research company updated its usage policies on Oct. 29 to clarify that users of ChatGPT can’t use the service for “tailored advice that requires a license, such as legal or medical advice, without appropriate involvement by a licensed professional.” Is this an actual technical change, or just legal CYA?

It's always been CYA. They know people are using it for this, and they want to keep answering these sorts of queries. The changes just reflect the latest guidance from their legal team, not a change in strategy.

Modern LLMs are already better than the median doctor diagnostically. Maybe not in certain specialties, but compared to a primary care physician available to the average person, I'd take the LLM any day.

Re: ChatGPT terms disallow its use in providing legal and medical advice to others

#144

Post by RobertDeNiro »

terminalshort wrote: post #110
cpfohl wrote: post #3

Tricky…my son had a really rare congenital issue that no one could solve for a long time. After it was diagnosed I walked an older version of chat gpt through our experience and it suggested my son’s issue as a possibility along with the correct diagnostic tool in just one back and forth. I’m not saying we should be getting AI advice without a professional, but I’m my case it could have saved my kid a LOT of physical…

Why are you saying we shouldn't get AI advice without a "professional", then? Why is everybody here saying "in my experience it's just as good or better, but we need rules to make people use the worse option"? I have narcolepsy and it took a dozen doctors before they got it right. AI nails the diagnosis. Everybody should be using it.

I wonder if the reason AI is better at these diagnostics, is because the amount of time it spends with the patient is unbounded. Whereas a doctor is always restricted by the amount of time they have with the patient.

Re: ChatGPT terms disallow its use in providing legal and medical advice to others

#145

Post by ghostly_s »

Johnny555 wrote: post #121
spullara wrote: post #74

This title is inaccurate. What they are disallowing are users using ChatGPT to offer legal and medical advice to other people. First parties can still use ChatGPT for medical and legal advice for themselves.

While they aren't stopping users from getting medical advice, the new terms (which they say are pretty much the same as the old terms), seem to prohibit users from seeking medical advice even for themselves if that advice would otherwise come from a licensed health professional: https://openai.com/en-GB/policies/usage-policies/ Your use of OpenAI services must follow these Usage Policies: Protect people. Everyone has…

I don't think giving someone "medical advice" in the US requires a license per se; legal entities use "this is not medical advice" type disclaimers just to avoid liability.

Re: ChatGPT terms disallow its use in providing legal and medical advice to others

#146

Post by silisili »

Johnny555 wrote: post #138
thorum wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IANAL but I read that as forbidding you to provision legal/medical advice (to others) rather than forbidding you to ask the AI to provision legal/medical advice (to you).

IANAL either, but I read it as using the service to provision medical advice since they only mentioned the service and not anyone else. I asked the "expert" itself (ChatGPT), and apparently you can ask for medical advice, you just can't use the medical advice without consulting a medical professional: Here are relevant excerpts from OpenAI’s terms and policies regarding medical advice and similar high-stakes usage: F…

> you can ask for medical advice, you just can't use the medical advice without consulting a medical professional

Ah drats. First they ban us from cutting the tags off our mattress, and now this. When will it all end...

Re: ChatGPT terms disallow its use in providing legal and medical advice to others

#147

Post by GuB-42 »

Johnny555 wrote: post #121
spullara wrote: post #74

This title is inaccurate. What they are disallowing are users using ChatGPT to offer legal and medical advice to other people. First parties can still use ChatGPT for medical and legal advice for themselves.

While they aren't stopping users from getting medical advice, the new terms (which they say are pretty much the same as the old terms), seem to prohibit users from seeking medical advice even for themselves if that advice would otherwise come from a licensed health professional: https://openai.com/en-GB/policies/usage-policies/ Your use of OpenAI services must follow these Usage Policies: Protect people. Everyone has…

Is there anything special regarding ChatGPT here?

I am not a doctor, I can't give medical advice no matter what my sources are, except maybe if I am just relaying the information an actual doctor has given me, but that would fall under the "appropriate involvement" part.

Re: ChatGPT terms disallow its use in providing legal and medical advice to others

#148

Post by fragmede »

Johnny555 wrote: post #121
spullara wrote: post #74

This title is inaccurate. What they are disallowing are users using ChatGPT to offer legal and medical advice to other people. First parties can still use ChatGPT for medical and legal advice for themselves.

While they aren't stopping users from getting medical advice, the new terms (which they say are pretty much the same as the old terms), seem to prohibit users from seeking medical advice even for themselves if that advice would otherwise come from a licensed health professional: https://openai.com/en-GB/policies/usage-policies/ Your use of OpenAI services must follow these Usage Policies: Protect people. Everyone has…

> such as legal or medical advice, without appropriate involvement by a licensed professional

Am I allowed to get haircutting advice (in places where there's a license for that)? How about driving directions? Taxi drivers require licensing. Pet grooming?

Re: ChatGPT terms disallow its use in providing legal and medical advice to others

#149

Post by degamad »

simonw wrote: post #122
gcr wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is wrong. Others in this thread are noticing a change in ChatGPT's behavior for first-party medical advice.

But OpenAI's head of Health AI says that ChatGPT's behavior has not changed: https://xcancel.com/thekaransinghal/status/19854160578054965... and https://x.com/thekaransinghal/status/1985416057805496524 I trust what he says over general vibes. (If you think he's lying, what's your theory on WHY he would lie about a change like this?)

Also possible: he's unaware of a change implemented elsewhere that (intentionally or unintentionally) has resulted in a change of behaviour in this circumstance.

(e.g. are the terms of service, or exerpts of it, available in the system prompt or search results for health questions? So a response under the new ToS would produce different outputs without any intentional change in "behaviour" of the model.)

Post reply on HN