211–220 of 403 posts
If you convince chatbot to sell you a car for $1, can you win in court if the manufacturer doesn't deliver?
Is there any indication that they will get the car? Getting a chatbot to say "legally binding" probably doesn't make it so. Just like changing the HTML of the catalog to edit prices doesn't entitle you to anything.
Can software legally enter into a contract on behalf of a natural/legal person?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, it probably isn't available in that exact build configuration. You can however, walk into a dealership and say I'd like a BMW with XYZ and the will submit your order and you'll receive it 4-6 months later. The cars on the lot have popular build configs that customers often request.
Meanwhile, I ordered a Tesla while I was in the shower. I even got financing. It showed up a week later.
A real Orderbot has the menu items and prices as part of the chat context. So an attacker can just overwrite them. During my Ekoparty presentation about prompt injections, I talked about Orderbot Item-On-Sale Injection: https://youtu.be/ADHAokjniE4?t=927 We will see these kind of attacks in real world applications more often going forward - and I'm sure some ambitious company will have a bot complete orders at one po…
I think the first step will be replacing frontends with these bots, so most of the business logic should still apply and this won't be a valid attack vector. Horrible UX tho, as the transaction will fail.
I never understand people who engage with chat bots as customer service. I find them deeply upsetting, not one step above the phone robot on Vodafone support: "press 1 for internet problems" ... "press 2 to be transferred to a human representative". Only problem is going through like 7 steps until I can reach that human, then waiting some 30 minutes until the line is free. But it's the only approach that gets anythin…
Obviously I would have preferred to have received no fee in the first place, but in this case the robot was faster and less painful than chatting with a human.
I never understand people who engage with chat bots as customer service. I find them deeply upsetting, not one step above the phone robot on Vodafone support: "press 1 for internet problems" ... "press 2 to be transferred to a human representative". Only problem is going through like 7 steps until I can reach that human, then waiting some 30 minutes until the line is free. But it's the only approach that gets anythin…
The Bot offered to restart my DSL from their end and I assume the profile gets updated along the way there as well. So after a few minutes Internet was running at the desired speed again.
But I agree. Most of the Chatbots and Phone robots are useless to the point of directing you to the right department - asking for your authentication verification data for on-call support and then forwarding you to a Support Guy after 30 Minutes of waiting in the Queue. And even then in most cases you need to proof the same Auth data to the Support Guy again...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> Robots a a cruel joke on customers. My kid and I went 3 hours away for hew college orientation. She also booked 2 tours of apartments to look at while we were there. One of those was great, nice place, nice person helping. The other had kinda rude people in the office and had no actual units to show. "But I scheduled a tour!" turns out the chatbot "scheduled" a tour but was just making shit up. Had we not any othe…
Companies are going to find that they are liable for things they promise. A company representative is just that, and no ToS on a website will help evade that fact. If someone claims to be representing the company, and the company knows, and the interaction is reasonable, the company is on the hook! Just as they would be on the hook, if a human lies, or provides fraudulent information, or makes a deal with someone. Th…
Would that be their fraud or mine? They created answers.microsoft.com to outsource support to community volunteers, just like how this Chevy dealership outsourced support to a chatbot, allowing an incompetent or malicious 3rd party to speak with their voice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are dismissive, but I assure you this kind of thing will keep lawyers and courts busy for some time to come. This raises all kinds of interesting legal issues that have no obvious resolution: * can agency be delegated to an LLM? * can an LLM create a contract on behalf of itself? another? an organization? * does the answer change if the person(s) or organization(s) want the LLM to be able to form contracts? * are…
As a lawyer (but not your lawyer, this isn't legal advice), the actual questions themselves all seem pretty obvious under current contract law: * You can't actually delegate agency to a computer. The Restatement of the Law of Agency says an agent must be a person. * No, an LLM is not a human, so it can't make contracts in any respect. * If you agree in an actual contract to be bound by the black box of the LLM, then…
> an LLM is not a human, so it can't make contracts in any respect
Probably the most contentious question relates to AI inventorship, which is disallowed under Thaler v. Vidal (Fed. Cir. 2022), but is already laughably out of date with respect to the technology. The decision draws a similarly hard line regarding whether an inventor must be a human or not based on statutory interpretation.
But the patent office will soon be inundated with AI-authored or AI-assisted inventions, if they aren't already. Applicants will simply just not admit it or possibly opt for trade secret protection instead. Meanwhile, other countries may not take such a hard line, and that IP will make its way to China or the EU or wherever.
Of course this is all science fiction right now, since it's an open question as to whether an LLM will invent anything useful, but it's not implausible. My point is that I believe the question will be revisited very soon.
Is there any indication that they will get the car? Getting a chatbot to say "legally binding" probably doesn't make it so. Just like changing the HTML of the catalog to edit prices doesn't entitle you to anything.
Can software legally enter into a contract on behalf of a natural/legal person?