https://blog.quintarelli.it/2023/01/chatgpt-and-the-report-effect/ un mesetto e mezzo fa: "l'effetto report"
sembra tutto credibile quando lo leggi ma gli esperti dell'argomento vedono che è sbagliato ciao, s Il 8 aprile 2023 20:56:19 UTC, Alberto Cammozzo via nexa <[email protected]> ha scritto: > > ><https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/04/openai-may-be-sued-after-chatgpt-falsely-says-aussie-mayor-is-an-ex-con/> > > >Update, 8:30 pm: A spokesperson for Gordon Legal provided a statement to Ars >confirming that responses to text prompts generated by ChatGPT 3.5 and 4 vary, >with defamatory comments still currently being generated in ChatGPT 3.5. Among >"several false statements" generated by ChatGPT were falsehoods stating that >Brian Hood "was accused of bribing officials in Malaysia, Indonesia, and >Vietnam between 1999 and 2005, that he was sentenced to 30 months in prison >after pleading guilty to two counts of false accounting under the Corporations >Act in 2012, and that he authorised payments to a Malaysian arms dealer acting >as a middleman to secure a contract with the Malaysian Government." Because >"all of these statements are false," Gordon Legal "filed a Concerns Notice to >OpenAI" that detailed the inaccuracy and demanded a rectification. “As >artificial intelligence becomes increasingly integrated into our society, the >accuracy of the information provided by these services will come under close >legal scrutiny," James Naughton, Hood's lawyer, said, noting that if a >defamation claim is raised, it "will aim to remedy the harm caused" to Hood >and "ensure the accuracy of this software in his case.”) > >It was only a matter of time before ChatGPT—an artificial intelligence tool >that generates responses based on user text prompts—was threatened with its >first defamation lawsuit. That happened last month, Reuters reported today, >when an Australian regional mayor, Brian Hood, sent a letter on March 21 to >the tool’s developer, OpenAI, announcing his plan to sue the company for >ChatGPT’s alleged role in spreading false claims that he had gone to prison >for bribery. > >To avoid the landmark lawsuit, Hood gave OpenAI 28 days to modify ChatGPT’s >responses and stop the tool from spouting disinformation. > >According to Hood’s legal team, ChatGPT could seriously damage the mayor’s >reputation by falsely claiming that Hood had been convicted for taking part in >a foreign bribery scandal in the early 2000s while working for a subsidiary of >the Reserve Bank of Australia. Hood had worked for a subsidiary, Note Printing >Australia, but rather than being found guilty of bribery, Hood was the one who >notified authorities about the bribes. Reuters reported that Hood was never >charged with any crimes, but ChatGPT seems to have confused the facts when >generating some responses to text prompts inquiring about Hood's history. > >OpenAI did not immediately respond to Ars’ request for comment. > >Ars attempted to replicate the error using ChatGPT, though, and it seems >possible that OpenAI has fixed the errors as Hood's legal team has directed. >When Ars asked ChatGPT if Hood served prison time for bribery, ChatGPT >responded that Hood “has not served any prison time” and clarified that “there >is no information available online to suggest that he has been convicted of >any criminal offense.” Ars then asked if Hood had ever been charged with >bribery, and ChatGPT responded, “I do not have any information indicating that >Brian Hood, the current mayor of Hepburn Shire in Victoria, Australia, has >been charged with bribery.” > >Ars could not immediately reach Hood’s legal team to find out which text >prompts generated the alleged defamatory claims or to confirm if OpenAI had >responded to confirm that the error had been fixed. The legal team was still >waiting for that response at the time that Reuters' report published early >this morning. > >Hood’s lawyer, James Naughton, a partner at Gordon Legal, told Reuters that >Hood’s reputation is “central to his role” as an elected official known for >“shining a light on corporate misconduct.” If AI tools like ChatGPT threaten >to damage that reputation, Naughton told Reuters, “it makes a difference to >him." That's why the landmark defamation lawsuit could be his only course of >action if the alleged ChatGPT-generated errors are not corrected, he said. > >It's unclear to Hood how many people using ChatGPT were exposed to the >disinformation. Naughton told Reuters that the defamatory statements were so >serious that Hood could claim more than $130,000 in defamation damages under >Australian law. > >Whether companies like OpenAI could be held liable for defamation is still >debatable. It’s possible that companies could add sufficient disclaimers to >products to avoid such liability, and they could then pass the liability on to >users, who could be found to be negligently or intentionally spreading false >claims while knowing that ChatGPT cannot always be trusted. > >Australia has recently drawn criticism for how it has reviewed defamation >claims in the digital age. In 2020, Australia moved to redraft its defamation >laws after a high court ruling found that publishers using social media >platforms like Facebook should be held liable for defamatory third-party >comments on their pages, CNBC reported in 2021. That is contrary to laws >providing immunity shields for platforms, such as Section 230 in the US. > >At that time, Australia considered the question of whether online publishers >should be liable for defamatory statements made by commenters in online forums >“one of the most complex to address,” with “complications beyond defamation >law alone.” By the end of last year, Australian attorneys general were pushing >new reforms to ensure that publishers could avoid any liability, The Guardian >reported. > >Now it looks like new generative AI tools like ChatGPT that publish >potentially defamatory content will likely pose the next complex question—one >that regulators, who are just now wrapping their heads around publisher >liability on social media, may not yet be prepared to address. > >Naughton told Reuters that if Hood’s lawsuit proceeds, it would accuse OpenAI >of “giving users a false sense of accuracy by failing to include footnotes” >and failing to inform users how ChatGPT's algorithm works to come up with >answers that may not be completely accurate. AI ethics experts have urged >regulators to ensure that companies like OpenAI are more transparent about how >AI tools work. > >If OpenAI doesn't adequately respond to Hood's concerns, his lawsuit could >proceed before the laws clarify who is responsible for alleged AI-generated >defamation. > >"It would potentially be a landmark moment in the sense that it's applying >this defamation law to a new area of artificial intelligence and publication >in the IT space," Naughton told Reuters. > _______________________________________________ nexa mailing list [email protected] https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
