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

301–310 of 439 posts

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

#301

Post by eecc »

andsoitis wrote: post #291
PeterStuer wrote: post #273

I have seen more than once people using ChatGPT as a psychologist and psychiatrist and self diagnosing mental illnesses. It would be hilarious if it was not so disasterous. People with real questions get roped in by an enthusiastically confirming sycophantic model that will never question or push back, just confirm and lead on. Tbh, and I usually do not like this way of thought, but these are lawsuits waiting to happ…

> I have seen more than once people using ChatGPT as a psychologist and psychiatrist and self diagnosing mental illnesses. It would be hilarious if it was not so disasterous. What is the disaster?

"People with real questions get roped in by an enthusiastically confirming sycophantic model that will never question or push back, just confirm and lead on."

That wasn't too buried IMHO

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

#303

Post by oblio »

scarmig wrote: post #46
watwut wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they do that, they will be subject of regulations on medical devices. As they should be and means the end result will be less likely to promote complete crap then it is now.

And then users balk at the hefty fee and start getting their medical information from utopiacancercenter.com and the like.

Let them. You can't save those people anyway.

Science should be clearly labelled for those that can read. Everyone else can go eat blueberry leaves if they so choose.

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

#304

Post by mk89 »

liampulles wrote: post #296
mk89 wrote: post #295

I was wondering when they would start with the regulations. Next will be: you're allowed to use it, if your company/product is "HippocraticGPT"-certified, a bit like SOC or PCI compliance. This way they can craft an instance of GPT for your specific purposes (law, medicine, etc) and you know it's "safe" to use. This way they sell EE licenses, which is where the big $$$ are.

I think this would apply if they sought out government regulation that applies to all AI players, not just their own company.

...or they want to be the first to do it, as others don't have it.

OpenAI is the leading company, if they provide an instance you can use for legal advice, with relative certification etc., it'd be better to trust them rather than another random player. They create the software, the certification and the need for it.

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

#305

Post by oarsinsync »

KeplerBoy wrote: post #289
oarsinsync wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> LLMs are incredibly beneficial ... today. LLMs sometimes can be incredibly beneficial ... today LLMs sometimes can be incredibly harmful ... today Non-deterministic things aren't just one thing, they're whatever they happen to be in that particular moment.

Non-deterministic doesn't mean random or unpredictable. That's like saying the weather forecast is useless because it's not deterministic or always 100% accurate.

> Non-deterministic doesn't mean random or unpredictable. That's like saying the weather forecast is useless because it's not deterministic or always 100% accurate.

I don't know where you got 'useless' from. LLMs are great, sometimes. They're not, other times. Which remarkably, is just like weather forecasts. The weather forecast is sometimes completely accurate. The weather forecast is sometimes completely inaccurate.

LLMs, like weather forecasting, have gotten better as more time and money has been invested in them.

Neither are perfect. Both are sometimes very good. Both are sometimes not.

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

#307

Post by computerthings »

KeplerBoy wrote: post #289
oarsinsync wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> LLMs are incredibly beneficial ... today. LLMs sometimes can be incredibly beneficial ... today LLMs sometimes can be incredibly harmful ... today Non-deterministic things aren't just one thing, they're whatever they happen to be in that particular moment.

Non-deterministic doesn't mean random or unpredictable. That's like saying the weather forecast is useless because it's not deterministic or always 100% accurate.

[dead]

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

#308

Post by f4uCL9dNSnQm »

KeplerBoy wrote: post #289
oarsinsync wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> LLMs are incredibly beneficial ... today. LLMs sometimes can be incredibly beneficial ... today LLMs sometimes can be incredibly harmful ... today Non-deterministic things aren't just one thing, they're whatever they happen to be in that particular moment.

Non-deterministic doesn't mean random or unpredictable. That's like saying the weather forecast is useless because it's not deterministic or always 100% accurate.

Last time I used GPT-4.5 to analyze blood results it gave different output if I uploaded it as 2 instead of 3 separated CSV files. It was both amazing experience: clear and easy to understand statements, and list of most common causes. And terrifying: "What about X?", "You ar absolutely right, there where X results included, disregard everything I wrote above, here is the new analysis".

So for me non-deterministic means unpredictable. Yes, there was nothing random or non-deterministic in that case, I could repeat both scenarios multiple times and get same results again. But the result is affected by something I didn't expect to matter. That damages the trust in tool, no matter how we call it.

Post reply on HN