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

61–70 of 439 posts

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

#62

Post by blibble »

miltonlost wrote: post #53
blibble wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am being serious... the damage certain software engineers could do certainly surpasses most doctors

Ah sorry, I misread it as coming from someone who doesn't want licensing, so you were appealing to HN by switching to software engineers (and I know many on here loathe to think anything beyond "move fast and break things", which is the opposite of most (non-software) engineers. But yeah, I'd be down for at least some code of ethics, so we could have "do no harm" instead of "experiment on the mental states of childre…

> But yeah, I'd be down for at least some code of ethics, so we could have "do no harm" instead of "experiment on the mental states of children/adolescents/adults via algorithms and then do whatever is most addictive"

absolutely

if the only way to make people stop building evil (like your example) is to make individuals personally liable, then so be it

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

#63

Post by benrapscallion »

fluidcruft wrote: post #54
Zr01 wrote: post #28

The cynic in me thinks this is just a means to eventually make more money by offering paid unrestricted versions to medical and legal professionals. I'm well-aware that it's not a truth machine, and any output it provides should be verified, checked for references, and treated with due diligence. Yet the same goes for just about any internet search. I don't think some people not knowing how to use it warrants restric…

I think one of the challenges is attribution. For example if you use Google search to create a fraudulent legal filing there aren't any of Google's fingerprints on the document. It gets reported as malpractice. Whereas reporting on these things is OpenAI or whatever AI is responsible. So even from the perspective of protecting a brand it's unavoidable. Suppose (no idea if true) the Louvre robbers wore Nike shoes and…

This (attribution) is exactly the issue that was mentioned by LexisNexis CEO in a recent The Verge interview.

https://www.theverge.com/podcast/807136/lexisnexis-ceo-sean-...

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

#64

Post by BrenBarn »

I'd bet dollars to donuts it doesn't actually "end legal and medical advice", it just ends it in some ill-defined subset of situations they were able to target, while still leaving the engine capable of giving such advice in response to other prompts they didn't think to test.

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

#65

Post by MattDaEskimo »

doctoboggan wrote: post #42
bearhall wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it actually changed. I have a broken bone and have been consulting with ChatGPT (along with my doctor of course) for the last week. Last night it refused to give an opinion saying “ While I can’t give a medical opinion or formally interpret it”. First time I’d seen it object. I understand the change but it’s also a shame. It’s been a fantastically useful tool for talking through things and educating myself.

I suspect this is an area that a bit of clever prompting will now prove fruitful in. The system commands in the prompt will probably be "leaked" soon which should give you good avenues to explore.

It's these workarounds that inevitably end up with someone hurt and someone else blaming the LLM.

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

#67

Post by reducesuffering »

thedudeabides5 wrote: post #23

this is a disaster doomer's in control, again

Literally nothing to do with "doomers" X-risk concerns.

See if you can find "medical advice" ever mentioned as a problem:

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/kgb58RL88YChkkBNf/the-proble...

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

#69

Post by j45 »

doctoboggan wrote: post #42
bearhall wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it actually changed. I have a broken bone and have been consulting with ChatGPT (along with my doctor of course) for the last week. Last night it refused to give an opinion saying “ While I can’t give a medical opinion or formally interpret it”. First time I’d seen it object. I understand the change but it’s also a shame. It’s been a fantastically useful tool for talking through things and educating myself.

I suspect this is an area that a bit of clever prompting will now prove fruitful in. The system commands in the prompt will probably be "leaked" soon which should give you good avenues to explore.

Clever is one thing, sometimes just clear prompting (I want to know how to be better informed about what kinds of topics or questions to speak to the doctor/professional about) can go a long way.

Being clear that not all lawyers or doctors (in this example) are experts in every area of medicine and law, and knowing what to know and learn about and ask about is usually a helpful way.

While professionals have bodies for their standards and ethics, like most things it can represent a form of income, and depending on the jurisdiction, profitability.

Post reply on HN