Call us now:
Hallucinations, or just not confirming the veracity of the information that you have been presented with. The man in the middle is far from gone, as a judge highlights yet another failure by a law firm to check the veracity of its legal arguments and evidence. This time it involves a bulk transfer of insolvency applications.
To add further injury to the case, the law firm, according to the judge, attempted to explain away the error in the first submission to the court using a letter prepared by AI, which was also inconsistent with the facts.
There’s a saying that goes something like ‘when you are digging a hole, it’s sometimes a good idea to know when to stop digging’. Or in the case of AI, to know when AI should be used, when to provide oversight and assurance of outputs, and importantly, to use AI models that have guardrails baked into them. To try and keep AI focused on answering prompts against artefacts, no matter how accurate those artefacts may be.
AI does not hallucinate; it’s impossible for it to hallucinate as it has no consciousness and relies on mathematical-based reasoning.
@Thaddeus Dziekanowski Brian D. McCarthy
@Parava Security Solutions
#artificalintelligence #ai #aihallucinations
https://lnkd.in/ehQP3FWt
View Original Post
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn%3Ali%3Ashare%3A7465344770295463936