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

India's top court angry after junior judge cites fake AI-generated orders

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 212 posts

Re: India's top court angry after junior judge cites fake AI-generated orders

#71

Post by miltonlost »

AJ007 wrote: post #53
voidUpdate wrote: post #2

How many of these cases do we have to have before lawyers realise that they need to check that the things an LLM tells them are actually true?

This whole thing is silly, LLMs can automate reference validation. If someone is a lawyer, accountant, doctor, teacher, surgeon, engineer etc, and is regurgitating answers that were pumped out with with GPT-5-extra-low or whatever mediocre throttled model they are using, they should just be fired and de-credentialed. Right now this is easy. The real problem is ahead: 99.999% of future content that exists will be made…

> This whole thing is silly, LLMs can automate reference validation.

Can they though with 100% accuracy and no hallucinations? Wouldn't you still need to validate that they validated correctly?

Re: India's top court angry after junior judge cites fake AI-generated orders

#72

Post by AnimalMuppet »

raincole wrote: post #54
cmiles8 wrote: post #14

There will be many more things like this and it’s an elephant in the room for the supposed mass replacement of people with AI. Some human still has to be accountable. Someone has to get fired / go to jail when something screws up. You can make humans more productive but for the foreseeable future you can’t take the human out of the loop to have an AI implementation that’s not a disaster/lawsuit waiting to happen. Tha…

I don't believe most countries hold judges accountable for bad ruling at all even before AI era. "Check and balance, except judiciary."

In the US, local/state judges often are elected (probably varies by state). Federal judges can be impeached.

Re: India's top court angry after junior judge cites fake AI-generated orders

#76

Post by general_reveal »

jazzypants wrote: post #70
general_reveal wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, AI is going to be like when land lines became unnecessary when cellphones showed up in India. India may get to skip an entire intellectual generation due to the ability of a cheap model to educate (in any language). The narrative that an entire population are “worth” less, paid less , know less, live less … Fuck this less shit, embrace the paradigm shift. God is finally providing the remedial support through the…

We've had YouTube for two decades now. Cheap education was already available for those who wanted it.

[dead]

Re: India's top court angry after junior judge cites fake AI-generated orders

#77

Post by RobotToaster »

raincole wrote: post #54
cmiles8 wrote: post #14

There will be many more things like this and it’s an elephant in the room for the supposed mass replacement of people with AI. Some human still has to be accountable. Someone has to get fired / go to jail when something screws up. You can make humans more productive but for the foreseeable future you can’t take the human out of the loop to have an AI implementation that’s not a disaster/lawsuit waiting to happen. Tha…

I don't believe most countries hold judges accountable for bad ruling at all even before AI era. "Check and balance, except judiciary."

In the UK lower court judges are sometimes removed for misconduct.

Only the king (at the petition of parliament) can remove a high court or appeal court judge, and that's only ever happened once, in 1830.

Re: India's top court angry after junior judge cites fake AI-generated orders

#78

Post by MagicMoonlight »

loremium wrote: post #65
jfengel wrote: post #59

I feel like this points out a very general problem with the law: it generates a lot of boilerplate text. Lawyers don't really read it; they skim it for the relevant bits. Obviously lawyers should not be cheating with AI, especially when they don't even check it. But it does sound to me as if this is an opportunity to re-factor the process. We're carrying forward some ideas originally implemented in Latin, and which c…

law texts feel like a layering problem, like just decoration around decoration to avoid breaking existing 'code' without ever simplifying it

Okay so let’s try simplifying it.

We’ll change the existing murder legislation to “Killing someone is a crime”. It’ll save us thousands of pages.

But does that mean a soldier shooting an enemy is a crime? What about shooting someone who is raping you? What if you shoot someone by mistake, thinking they’re going to kill you? What if you hit them with a car? What if you fail to provide safety equipment which eventually results in their accidental death?

Oopsie woopsie, I guess we need to add another thousand pages of exceptions back to our simplistic laws. It turns out people didn’t just write them for the fun of it.

Re: India's top court angry after junior judge cites fake AI-generated orders

#80

Post by ForHackernews »

cmiles8 wrote: post #14

There will be many more things like this and it’s an elephant in the room for the supposed mass replacement of people with AI. Some human still has to be accountable. Someone has to get fired / go to jail when something screws up. You can make humans more productive but for the foreseeable future you can’t take the human out of the loop to have an AI implementation that’s not a disaster/lawsuit waiting to happen. Tha…

Counterpoint: No one ever gets fired or goes to jail when big tech firms break the law. Companies will put out an apology, pay whatever small fine is imposed, and continue with illegal AI usage at scale.
Post reply on HN