But the explanation and Ramirez’s promise to educate himself on the use of AI wasn’t enough, and the judge chided him for not doing his research before filing. “It is abundantly clear that Mr. Ramirez did not make the requisite reasonable inquiry into the law. Had he expended even minimal effort to do so, he would have discovered that the AI-generated cases do not exist. That the AI-generated excerpts appeared valid to Mr. Ramirez does not relieve him of his duty to conduct a reasonable inquiry,” Judge Dinsmore continued, before recommending that Ramirez be sanctioned for $15,000.

Falling victim to this a year or more after the first guy made headlines for the same is just stupidity.

  • webghost0101
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    Neurosama is a fun example but we dont really know the sauce vedal coocked up.

    When i say proven i mean 32 page research paper specifically looking into it.

    https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.12831

    They found that even a model trained specifically on honesty will lie if it has an incentive.

    The reasoning models will output that they used the forbidden tool in their reasoning window before lying in the final output.