1185
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] JackFrostNCola@aussie.zone 4 points 5 hours ago

I would say its to protect people, if you ask a LLM for a legal answer and trust it, then you could get into legal trouble when it turns out to be wrong.
Not only are LLMs wrong like ~1/10th of the time (for the more advanced ones) but law is also an area where there is black and white rules, but also there is interpretation of some aspects.
Some things are set in stone and some are about understanding the intention of the law and being able to back that up in a court if it was challenged.

Do you want the public trusting a LLM that says "oh yes you can claim a tax deduction for an Xbox because its for stress relief related to your job" and then you get whacked with a fine for incorrectly filing your tax.

Using a LLM to help your draft an email to your uncle = low risk. Using a LLM to help you decide if you actually need a medical procedure your doctor has reccomended = high risk.

[-] SinAdjetivos@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

If that was the logic we were using then Wikipedia shouldn't be allowed to have articles on health and law either. WebMD shouldn't have ever been legal either.

Obviously, the benefits to having that information available outweigh the hypothetical negatives. Even with them being incorrect, partial and easy to draw invalid conclusions from, having the information be freely and readily accessible is better for everyone.

this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2026
1185 points (100.0% liked)

Fuck AI

7731 readers
1916 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS