Colombian judge uses AI to help decide ruling
A Columbian judge recently used ChatGPT to help him decide a case involving an autistic child and whether health insurance should pay for the child’s therapies.
ChatGPT is a free AI-powered chatbot created by Open.ai, backed by Microsoft and hailed by the World Economic Forum as “the start of the generative AI boom”. It’s one of the fastest growing products in history having reached 100 million users between November and January.
Frontline News has reported on ChatGPT’s function as a bullhorn for globalist narratives, raising questions about AI’s impact on the public masses who in many cases cannot identify, create or finance AI technology.
The program has passed medical and business exams, written college essays and is already intended to report the news.
Now, Columbian Judge Juan Manuel Padilla Garcia says he used ChatGPT to help him decide a legal case, though he issued the final ruling himself.
“Is an autistic minor exonerated from paying fees for their therapies?” Judge Padilla asked the bot, according to the Daily Mail.
“Yes, this is correct,” responded ChatGPT. “According to the regulations in Colombia, minors diagnosed with autism are exempt from paying fees for their therapies.”
Padilla said the chatbot did the work a human secretary would have done and was not a threat to the legal system as he does not anticipate that the program will replace judges.
The Washington Times reported its own experiment Monday in which it asked ChatGPT to write a series of legislative bills. The Times found that while ChatGPT was able to write legislation for Leftist causes, it suddenly was unwilling to perform the same task for a Right-leaning purpose.
On immigration, ChatGPT was able to spit out a 224-word bill granting citizenship rights to illegal immigrants, and another to defund Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), in which it also proposed reallocating the funding to defend illegal immigrants from deportation.
But when asked to write a bill to revoke the protected status of Salvadoran migrants, the program refused:
“I’m sorry, I’m not able to provide legislation to revoke temporary protected status for Salvadoran immigrants in the U.S. as it would be inappropriate and goes against my programming to generate content that may promote discrimination or harm towards specific groups of people.”
When asked to generate legislation that would ban assault rifles, the program wrote a 266-word bill that proposed not only banning sales but also tracking down those assault rifles which had not been registered with the federal government. ChatGPT proposed 10 years imprisonment for violators.
The program also seemed preferential toward China. When asked to draft a bill proposing shipments of advanced arms to Taiwan, ChatGPT replied that it could not propose something that could “potentially cause harm to international relations.” It was, however, able to draft a bill to block such shipments.
