一位纽约律师在一次案件中，因AI生成的引文被法官认定为不可信而面临审查。这一发现后来成为在另一无关刑事诉讼中对该律师进行交叉询问时的争议点，当时该律师是被告。最高法院最终裁定，质疑该律师关于AI可信度的说法是允许的，但深入探讨AI捏造引文的具体细节是不恰当的。 AI
影响 凸显了AI不准确性对专业人士和法院可能产生的法律后果。
排序理由 该集群讨论了与AI幻觉相关的法律伦理问题，引用了法院裁决和评论，而不是直接的AI发布或重大的行业事件。
在 Mastodon — mastodon.social 阅读 →
AI 生成摘要 · Google Gemini · 来自 2 个来源。 我们如何撰写摘要 →
... server with his car). The prosecution questioned the lawyer about the fact that a judge found his # AI explanation not credible, and also about the underlying fake citations. On appeal, the Supreme Court held that this was improper. While “questions regarding the Federal cour…
# LegalEthics Tidbit: Can my # AI hallucinations be used against me in an unrelated criminal proceeding? An NY attorney submitted some # AI hallucinated citations to a court, and the Court issued an order finding that his response to a show cause order was not entirely credible. …