Pro Hac Vice revoked means she was not a member of the bar in the first place. Basically a special guest attorney who will not be returning for another episode.
I work in a field where I have occasion to use chatgpt to find relevant citations, but yeah, I have two brain cells to rub together, so I actually look up the citations chatgpt spits out to confirm that 1) they exist (sometimes they don’t) and 2) they say what chatgpt says they say (sometimes they don’t).
People who think AI is a full-on replacement for human thinking and judgment, and not a tool to complement it, are retarded.
It's bizarre to me that someone would do this and not at least look up the cases themselves to verify.
Immediate disbarment, IMO.
To be completely fair the way “precedent” is treated by our legal system they didn’t do much different by completely fabricating things.
Make up case and judge names? Career over (rightfully).
Make up precedent and completely misrepresent what a given case concluded and use that as justification for making an activistic ruling? All good.
Some of the highest paid lawyers in the country have already done that to eat orange Badman. AI is just using the tactics it was trained on.
Pro Hac Vice revoked means she was not a member of the bar in the first place. Basically a special guest attorney who will not be returning for another episode.
I work in a field where I have occasion to use chatgpt to find relevant citations, but yeah, I have two brain cells to rub together, so I actually look up the citations chatgpt spits out to confirm that 1) they exist (sometimes they don’t) and 2) they say what chatgpt says they say (sometimes they don’t).
People who think AI is a full-on replacement for human thinking and judgment, and not a tool to complement it, are retarded.