>Lawyers for the Brooklyn, N.Y.-based landlord submitted a brief to a lower court containing "hallucinatory" citations created by generative AI

oof. I really can't believe this. Well I can but don't want to

First, the lawyers will discover that AI is inherently unreliable.

And then they will monetize educating the rest of the world to this fact.

In other words, applying current AI to anything "important" is a liability issue waiting to happen.

> "Unfortunately," they wrote, "Counsel did not notice that AI had intuitively made changes to the brief prior to filing."

What does intuitively made changes mean here?

[dead]