I've been saying this for over a year now --- AI is a legal liability issue waiting to happen.<p>And not just in the legal field. The problem boils down to the very fundamental fact that AI is based on probability and statistics.<p>The results can't be legally defended in many cases because they are not derived from a reasonable, logical, reproduceable decision making process.<p>Here is an example from the medical industry. Really *important* results shouldn't be decided by a dice roll.<p><a href="https://pub.towardsai.net/the-air-gapped-chronicles-the-court-asked-for-the-llms-reasoning-48471090eada" rel="nofollow">https://pub.towardsai.net/the-air-gapped-chronicles-the-cour...</a>

Pessimistic prediction: Companies are already using mandatory arbitration provisions in contracts, some will want a not-really "Expert System" to do the arbitration.<p>That said, an unscrupulous and lazy judge can already betray their position by outsourcing to an LLM in a personal capacity.

Apparently <i>The Register</i> changed the title of this article. Someone posted it 10 hours before this post: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47749485">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47749485</a>

Its the same thing , Happening for a while.