this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2023
72 points (97.4% liked)

Technology

58774 readers
3217 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemm.ee
fry@fry.gs
L3s@fry.gs
enu@lemmy.world
L4s@fry.gs
L4s@lemmy.world
72
Humiliated lawyers fined $5,000 for submitting ChatGPT hallucinations in court: ‘I heard about this new site, which I falsely assumed was, like, a super search engine’ (fortune.com)
submitted 1 year ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
24 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The judge scolded the lawyers for doubling down on their fake citations.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MargotRobbie@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Here lies the problem, ChatGPT is not a search engine, instead you can think of it as a compressed JPEG of the Internet (Credits to Ted Chiang). It can get you things that LOOK right if you squint your eyes a bit, but you just can't be sure that it is not just some random compression artifacts.

The problem is that OpenAI is hyping ChatGPT up as something that it is not.