ChatGPT: the dilemma of artificial intelligence and a challenge for Justice

Share This Post

- Advertisement -

By Lucas of Venice*

- Advertisement -

Recent innovations in the field of information technology related to the development of new and improved Artificial Intelligence (AI)along with its irruption and direct implications in the Argentine legal system and in their practices they invite us to rethink new scenarios which look like unmapped territory.

There is a real possibility to analyze the prolonged coexistence – or not – with new computer systems which include great and/or questionable advances in digital knowledge tools. We are talking about advanced technology and its direct application in law.

- Advertisement -

We are proactive in ensuring that the impact of this new technology on the justice system and academic establishments is fair and just for all? How does this fit into existing principles and rules?

THE implementation of artificial intelligence in the legal world must be carefully considered and planned, with an approach based on ethics and the transparency. It is necessary that the AI ​​is designed in such a way that, in addition to avoiding discrimination and guaranteeing Justice, it has it continuous review and evaluation mechanisms to ensure its correct use.

ChatGPT, a disruptive technology

The recent appearance of ChatGPT3developed by artificial intelligence laboratory Open AI, change everything. It is a type of artificial intelligence that allows users to directly interact with the machine through a chatbots in a practical, simple, extremely agile and versatile way.

All through a fluid, receptive and funny dialogues where the computer is embedding and capturing every interaction it receives, from questions and concerns to statements or corrections you make. Primarily designed for mimic patterns of human conversation, Chat GPT It is extremely useful and controversial.

Breaking it down further, these chatbots are so powerful that they boast the skill multitasking of power create journalistic, legal or academic texts, in keynotes, papers or thesesproduce songs, poems, poems, create laboratory formulas or solve school assignments.

Its scope has no tangible limits and of course we are indeed in the presence of an initial prototype which is in constant development and which will no doubt continue to evolve.

If the same application is made a Chat GPT Of two different usersis likely to produce similar responses, but not necessarily identical. As the model receives more information and is trained with new data, its ability to generate unique and original responses increases.

It is important to pay attention ChatGPT has no conscience or intentionis just a mathematical model that is based on linguistic patterns, so the responses generated are not original in the human sense of the word, but are combinations of phrases and words already seen in the text with which you have been trained.

Moreover, it lacks the ability to apply ethical or moral criteria in his answers, since he has no canons that allow him to distinguish between good and evil.

ChatGPT: moral dilemmas

This systematized and unlimited access to all kinds of information generates controversies in different fields of studyfor example, in orthodox epistemology it represents the controversies to be placed directly as a threat to human capability interact slowly, thoughtfully and thoroughly, in a way of intellectual honesty, with a book or with any type of complex argument put in writing.

The appearance of this intelligence could have a significant impact on teaching methodology. Perhaps gradually and as this technology spreads, the routines or old memotechnical rules surrounding the way we teach and learn will be progressively abandoned.

How we used to commune with these study habits will change, as blunt as that may sound; it will no longer be so relevant to know how to do somethingbut it will be about understanding where to find what you need and how to assign a computerized value to that search.

It will necessarily be necessary to focus on machine learning. AI builds on this and teaching methodologies could be adapted to teach students how to use these techniques to analyze data and make decisions. This innovation can generate automated decisions, so it is important to teach students how to analyze and question the reasoning behind AI decisions, stimulating the critical thinking.

ChatGPT: artificial intelligence in Justice

Artificial intelligence is being used more and more for improve the efficiency and accuracy of the justice system. This question is a reality, since automated analysis of legal documents to the same computer representation in judicial processes. However, with this technology comes the responsibility of ensuring that the rights of the most vulnerable are not violated and the levels of inequality of the parties involved in the process are deepened, which constitutes a significant chapter of the constitutional procedural law.

Argentina is seeing an increase in the adoption of AI technologies in the legal sector, with a particular focus on the use of chatbots such as Chat GPT. These natural language programs enable lawyers automate repetitive tasksimprove efficiency and provide better customer service.

When asked whether or not ChatGPT can be implemented in the Argentine judicial system, the chatbot itself replied:

THE Implementation of ChatGPT in Argentine justice could have different uses depending on the specific purpose, some examples could include:

  • Analysis of legal documents: ChatGPT could be used to analyze large quantities of legal documents, such as judgments and laws, to help judges make decisions.
  • Legal Document Generation: ChatGPT could be used to generate automated legal documents, such as judgments and orders, quickly and accurately.
  • Outcome prediction: ChatGPT could be used to predict possible outcomes of a case, based on patterns and relationships identified in the data.

In general terms, AI can process large amounts of data and documents quickly and accuratelywhich can help streamline judicial decision-making, identify patterns and relationships that may go unnoticed by humans and undoubtedly reduce costs by automating tasks and processesHowever, in the balance we have to weigh them too risks.

Mainly visible in terms of possible situations of discriminationresulting in the replication of existing inequalities or biases in the data used for its training, from which the chatbot obtains its sources, a crucial issue that can lead to wrong decisions.

The question regarding the “transparency” It is another advantage to consider since it can be difficult to understand how the AI ​​arrives at its decisions, which can make it difficult to review and evaluate them, in addition to their ethical considerations, as already expressed initially.

It is essential to note that although we are in the presence of advanced technology, it is still present development processergo it is fair to point out that with regard to the legal issues that this AI has been asked -sometimes- it has raised wrong or inaccurate answers, which, if necessary, could lead lawyers and/or judges to make wrong decisions. Therefore, caution is warranted when evaluating these new AI tools: surveillance of the man continues to be an essential counter-insurance.

We’ve just managed to assess some of the changes that could come with the GPT chatbot. The first response seen in study centers in the United States (New York, Seattle) was to ban them from the Wi-Fi networks of those places, which is naive and ineffective given that it can be accessed via mobile data.

A provisional conclusion leads to a case-by-case study, in a context where there is interaction between user and machine, honesty in everyone’s contribution and transparency of roles. The didactics will be put to the test with tendencies towards the increase of the presence in the classroom and of specific and differentiated arguments. The bot tends towards automated and linear response; He human thought must be sophisticated and multifaceted survive as such to the ravages of the present time.

*Lucas de Venezia is a lawyer (UCA), doctoral candidate in law (UNLZ) and university and postgraduate professor (UCES).

Source: Clarin

- Advertisement -

Related Posts