Call us now:
A reminder from the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) about the using AI in protest submissions. In this case We dismiss the protest as academic based on the agency’s termination of the challenged order. As the protester used AI without checking the citations, case names and the existence of content that did not exist.The GAO also made clear that irregularities may result in the imposition of sanctions. The GAO took it further requested that the protester submit comments (1) addressing the basis for the case citations in its responses to the requests for dismissal; (2) providing copies of the cases cited in those responses; and (3) if the protester’s representative is an attorney, identifying the state(s) in which he is licensed to practice law.The protester confirmed that hey had relied on AI without checking the validity of the content. Sanctioning the attorneys and dismissed the protest.AI is without doubt a powerful tool, but it comes with a health warning. General AI is exactly that, general. Models are learning and hallucinations are a very real threat. AI does not abdicate the user for checking submissions and content. The man/ woman in the middle is always required.This is not the first case where the use of AI without proper oversight and assurance has been questioned. Several cases have arisen in US, UK and Australian courts where legal teams have used AI, without the proper due diligence of content. Leading to questions and possible sanctions against those that have submitted court responses.@Thaddeus Dziekanowski Brian D. McCarthy Faisal Khan Rachel V. Rose, JD, MBAVeritas GRC#artificalintelligence #cybersecurity #cyberattack
View Original Post
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn%3Ali%3AugcPost%3A7329042616375721984