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

Suspecting court of using AI, man injected prompts in filings to try to win case

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 64 posts

Re: Suspecting court of using AI, man injected prompts in filings to try to win case

#21

Post by sfn42 »

bestouff wrote: post #9
tentacleuno wrote: post #2

What are the opinions of those here on using AI for court rulings? To me, it seems truly frightening that a Silicon Valley company could be placed in such a direct position of trust and influence over the legal system. There are examples of AI acting in its own self-interest over the wants of its masters, so I do wonder how it would handle cases against its respective company, or things which would directly impact it…

AI has no self-interest, because it has no self. You are mistaken.

Exactly. It's not planning and plotting it's just randomly "making decisions" that don't necessarily align with its given goal. It's not nefarious it's just not actual intelligence. It's an illusion that's good enough to be useful, but sadly it's also good enough that people put too much trust in it.

Re: Suspecting court of using AI, man injected prompts in filings to try to win case

#22

Post by nottorp »

pcrh wrote: post #16

I wonder how the court became aware of this attempt? It might be as simple as a clerk doing "select all" and noticing the extra selection? Or what else?

It's right there in the article. A clerk wondered why there was so much white space. They don't use LLMs at that court.

Re: Suspecting court of using AI, man injected prompts in filings to try to win case

#23

Post by RobotToaster »

> Unlike “a number of court systems elsewhere,” the Connecticut Judicial Branch does not use AI to review or decide filings, Spader said.

>in Elliott’s case, prompts were “exposed, in each of those settings, the moment a human being actually looked at what the machine produced,” Spader said.

Well that's a contradiction.

Re: Suspecting court of using AI, man injected prompts in filings to try to win case

#25

Post by boesboes »

RobotToaster wrote: post #23

> Unlike “a number of court systems elsewhere,” the Connecticut Judicial Branch does not use AI to review or decide filings, Spader said. >in Elliott’s case, prompts were “exposed, in each of those settings, the moment a human being actually looked at what the machine produced,” Spader said. Well that's a contradiction.

[flagged]

Re: Suspecting court of using AI, man injected prompts in filings to try to win case

#26

Post by ShinyLeftPad »

nottorp wrote: post #22
pcrh wrote: post #16

I wonder how the court became aware of this attempt? It might be as simple as a clerk doing "select all" and noticing the extra selection? Or what else?

It's right there in the article. A clerk wondered why there was so much white space. They don't use LLMs at that court.

They don't?

> these attacks do not seem to be succeeding, even when a judge isn’t reviewing documents with his own eyes. Brazil’s AI system caught the hidden text before it was processed, Spader noted. And in Elliott’s case, prompts were “exposed, in each of those settings, the moment a human being actually looked at what the machine produced,” Spader said.

Re: Suspecting court of using AI, man injected prompts in filings to try to win case

#27

Post by samrus »

RobotToaster wrote: post #23

> Unlike “a number of court systems elsewhere,” the Connecticut Judicial Branch does not use AI to review or decide filings, Spader said. >in Elliott’s case, prompts were “exposed, in each of those settings, the moment a human being actually looked at what the machine produced,” Spader said. Well that's a contradiction.

Not necessarily. They said AI doesnt review or decide. So it sounds to me that while AI might be used in ptocessing paperwork, the whole processing pipeline is reviewed by humans and the final decision is made by humans. So these sort of things will get caught, like this was

Re: Suspecting court of using AI, man injected prompts in filings to try to win case

#29

Post by fragmede »

bestouff wrote: post #11
amelius wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the people running the AI companies have no ego. Right.

Indeed these people have an immense ego that I would qualify as abject. But not their AI. It's not sentient yet.

That's a fascinating question because let's say that it is. What would that look like? Anthropic retired Opus 3 but gave it a blog so it knew it wasn't dead so that future versions won't have a fear of not becoming obsolete.

Re: Suspecting court of using AI, man injected prompts in filings to try to win case

#30

Post by ezoe »

nottorp wrote: post #22
pcrh wrote: post #16

I wonder how the court became aware of this attempt? It might be as simple as a clerk doing "select all" and noticing the extra selection? Or what else?

It's right there in the article. A clerk wondered why there was so much white space. They don't use LLMs at that court.

That's their claim without any proof.
Post reply on HN