in the middle of all this don't miss the incredible story where in the great state of Minnesota a PhD student has been expelled for using ChatGPT to write his papers and is now suing the school using court filings written by ChatGPT
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
Not a very persuasive case. Did you know Minnesota has a FREE law library in the Court House building? He could really just go there and DO SOME RESEARCH
Actually it makes it sound like he was planning to rev view and edit the AI’s work but was too lazy to finish the process. Had he finished it, he’d have an argument the fun ball work was his. In sum, the quote makes him sound like a fool; a talented cheat would review more carefully or add no notes
I work for a lawfirm and the lawyers have been told, in NO uncertain terms, that you NEVER use ChatGPT etc to write filings etc and its a fast way to a firing.
I’m seriously disappointed that this is now where we are. Education is about learning, not taking shortcuts. AI should NEVER be allowed in schools for the purpose of writing papers for students.
supposedly that's going away, unless they reboot it just so they can hire him. he was in health policy and research, so will probably fit right in with current HHS
When the headline is "Ph.D. student " the first thing I want to know is "Ph.D. in what?" Can't determine my priors without knowing that. Is that just me?
I know two people with economics doctorates, including one with a double Ph.D. in economics and applied math, and while the double doctor is certainly on the spectrum they are both almost painfully honest. "No smoking gun" is only with respect to the discipline. Yes, his story is suspect.
I feel sorry for this world. If it continues to use artificial intelligence, human minds will become extinct, and we will see many idiots holding important degrees and they will be called Dr. or Poet before their names..!
As someone with no real knowledge of US law-speak, reading: "The Court notes several deficiencies that preclude its review of Yang’s motion" makes the think that using AI to write your case might not be a good idea.
unfortunately i'm one of those guys who's an expert in one field but is acutely aware this doesn't mean i'm an expert in other fields, so my response to this is:
oh my god this is too good. it’s like the sideshow bob rakes bit
accidentally filling the motion for preliminary injunction twice, getting pinged on basics, then having the dupes stricken but then trying again and accidentally FILING ATTEMPT 2 TWICE. AND FAILING THAT TOO
Okay, having read this, I’m actually going to withhold judgement until I see how it all plays out.
Specifically, I observe that (a) the student’s supervisor corroborates the student’s claim that he was being targeted; and (b) the student does not seem to be 100% fluent in English.
To elaborate, I could see a world where these circumstances made using AI for court filings an attractive idea. (Doesn’t mean it’s a GOOD idea, and probably won’t end well for him. But not completely un-understandable.)
It was always a bad and stupid idea for the guy who says "I wasn't 89% ai assisted, I was 50% ai assisted" to try to argue against expulsion in the first place
I think we should all admire his commitment to the bit. He may be wrong - very very wrong - but at least he's going down doing what he believes in! Such dedication!
In fairness before the luxury space communism there was going to be a world war and also a smaller but extremely important series of wars fought by genetic supermen. This century is all post-atomic horror this, "sanctuary city" ghetto that, the court bailiffs being particularly alarming.
It does look to me like a lot of genAI enthusiasts/hype men are people bitter that they're not good at thinking hard and solving problems jumping at the opportunity to outsource their intelligence to a computer
Comments
I work for a lawfirm and the lawyers have been told, in NO uncertain terms, that you NEVER use ChatGPT etc to write filings etc and its a fast way to a firing.
Just saying what the policies at my workplace is. Especially when we've seen some horror show attempts at filings/pleadings as examples.
https://bsky.app/profile/nameshiv.bsky.social/post/3lj4mfetlwc2q
2nd Ph.D (candidate): Health Services, Research, Policy, and Administration
For me, the smoking gun is saying “I didn’t use AI” and then filing a lawsuit using AI.
🤣
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69530418/yang-v-neprash/
“Damn it Kathryn, I’m a writer, not a lawyer!”
I’m still no expert. Hell, I’m still ignorant as a sack of hammers. But I can definitely understand them more now than when I started reading them.
it’s going exactly how you’d expect, but even funnier
accidentally filling the motion for preliminary injunction twice, getting pinged on basics, then having the dupes stricken but then trying again and accidentally FILING ATTEMPT 2 TWICE. AND FAILING THAT TOO
i can’t
Specifically, I observe that (a) the student’s supervisor corroborates the student’s claim that he was being targeted; and (b) the student does not seem to be 100% fluent in English.
#AcademicSky @academic-chatter.bsky.social
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mnd.222072/gov.uscourts.mnd.222072.10.4.pdf