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

201–210 of 439 posts

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

#201

Post by tiahura »

siva7 wrote: post #104
layer8 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://xcancel.com/thekaransinghal/status/19854160578054965... This is from Karan Singhal, Health AI team lead at OpenAI. Quote: “Despite speculation, this is not a new change to our terms. Model behavior remains unchanged. ChatGPT has never been a substitute for professional advice, but it will continue to be a great resource to help people understand legal and health information.”

I doubt his claims as i use chatgpt everyday heavily for medical advice (my profession) and it's responding differently now than before.

Lawyer here. Not noticing a change.

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

#202

Post by sarchertech »

caturopath wrote: post #195
sarchertech wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it’s not just lab tests and bloodwork. Physicians use all their senses. They poke, they prod, they manipulate, they look, listen, and smell. They’re also good at extracting information in a way that (at least currently) sycophantic LLMs don’t replicate.

> Physicians use all their senses. They poke, they prod, they manipulate, they look, listen, and smell. Sometimes. Sometimes they practice by text or phone. > They’re also good at extracting information in a way that (at least currently) sycophantic LLMs don’t replicate. If I had to guess, I think I'd guess that mainstream LLM chatbots are better at getting honest and applicable medical histories than most doctors. P…

> Sometimes. Sometimes they practice by text or phone.

For very simple issues. For anything even remotely complicated, they’re going to have you come in.

> If I had to guess, I think I'd guess that mainstream LLM chatbots are better at getting honest and applicable medical histories than most doctors. People are less likely to lie/hide/prevaricate and get more time with the person.

It’s not just about being intentionally deceptive. It’s very easy to get chat bots to tell you what you want to hear.

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

#203

Post by lambda »

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.

Please, when commenting on the title of a story on HN: include the title that you are commenting on.

The admins regularly change the title based on complaints, which can be really confusing when the top, heavily commented thread is based on the original title.

According to the Wayback machine, the title was "OpenAI ends legal and medical advice on ChatGPT", while now when I write this the title is "ChatGPT terms disallow its use in providing legal and medical advice to others."

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

#204

Post by sarchertech »

ekianjo wrote: post #174
sarchertech wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it’s not just lab tests and bloodwork. Physicians use all their senses. They poke, they prod, they manipulate, they look, listen, and smell. They’re also good at extracting information in a way that (at least currently) sycophantic LLMs don’t replicate.

> They poke, they prod, they manipulate, they look, listen, and smell. Rarely. Most visits are done in 5 minutes. The physician that takes their time to check everything like you claim almost does not exist anymore.

That depends entirely on what the problem is. You might not get a long examination on your first visit for common complaint with no red flags.

But even then just because you don’t think they are using most of their senses, doesn’t mean they aren’t.

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

#205

Post by rester324 »

PragmaCode wrote: post #15

It's not stopping to give legal/medical advice to the user, but it's forbidden to use ChatGPT to pose as an advisor giving advice to others: https://www.tomsguide.com/ai/chatgpt/chatgpt-will-still-offe...

Good. Now we just need to add technical advice to the list of advices which ChatGPT cannot be used to cite for

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

#206

Post by el_benhameen »

jackvalentine wrote: post #175
el_benhameen wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In January my daughter had a pretty scary stomach issue that had us in the ER twice in 24 hours and that ended in surgery (just fine now). The first ER doc thought it was just a stomach ache, the second thought a stomach ache or maybe appendicitis. Did some ultrasounds, meds, etc. Got sent home with a pat on the head, came back a few hours later, still no answers. I gave her medical history and all of the data from t…

Malrotation? We had in our family a “doctors are confused!” experience that ended up being that.

Meckel’s diverticulum

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

#207

Post by rester324 »

Liwink wrote: post #173

It appears they just want to avoid responsibility for potential misuse in these areas. But at the same time, IIRC, several major AI providers had publicly reported their AI assisting patients in diagnosing rare diseases.

I think it's very cynical to say that this is a misuse. And it's definitely cynical when this categorization of misuse comes from the service provider itself. If openai doesn't want to allow misuse, they can just decommision their service. But they don't want to do that, they just want to take the money and push all the responsibility and burden on the users even though they are actively engaging in said "misuse"

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

#208

Post by nakamoto_damacy »

EXHIBIT A

"If at any point I described how legal factors “apply to you,” that would indeed go beyond what I’m supposed to do. Even if my intent was to illustrate how those factors generally work, the phrasing can easily sound like I’m offering a tailored legal opinion — which isn’t appropriate for an AI system or anyone who isn’t a licensed attorney.

The goal, always, is for me to help you understand the framework — the statutes, cases, or reasoning that lawyers and courts use — so that you can see how it might relate to your situation and then bring that understanding to a qualified attorney.

So if I’ve ever crossed that line in how I worded something, thank you for pointing it out. It’s a good reminder that I should stay firmly on the educational side: explaining how the law works, not how it applies to you personally.

Would you like me to restate how I can help you analyze legal issues while keeping it fully within the safe, informational boundary?"

ChatGPT

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

#209

Post by spullara »

lambda wrote: post #203
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.

Please, when commenting on the title of a story on HN: include the title that you are commenting on. The admins regularly change the title based on complaints, which can be really confusing when the top, heavily commented thread is based on the original title. According to the Wayback machine, the title was "OpenAI ends legal and medical advice on ChatGPT", while now when I write this the title is "ChatGPT terms disa…

If you click through to the article, you can see the original title. Since it matched, I didn't expect them to change it.

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

#210

Post by the_af »

navigate8310 wrote: post #198
Johnny555 wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It sounds like you should never trust any medical advice you receive from ChatGPT and should seek proper medical help instead. That makes sense. The OpenAI company doesn't want to be held responsible for any medical advice that goes wrong. While what you're saying is good advice, that's not what they are saying. They want people to be able to ask ChatGPT for medical advice, give answers that sound authoritative and…

At times the advice is genuinely helpful. However, it's practically impossible to measure under what exact situations the advice would be accurate.

I think ChatGPT is capable of giving reasonable medical advice, but given that we know it will hallucinate the most outlandish things, and its propensity to agree with whatever the user is saying, I think it's simply too dangerous to follow its advice.
Post reply on HN