• RedditWanderer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    It’s not weird because of that. The bot could have easily explained it can’t answer legally, it didn’t need to say: sorry gotta end this k bye

    This is probably a trigger on preventing it from mixing in laws of AI or something, but people would expect it can discuss these things instead of shutting down so it doesn’t get played. Saying the AI acted as a lawyer is a pretty weak argument to blame copilot.

    Edit: no idea who is downvoting this but this isn’t controversial. This is specifically why you can inject prompts into data fed into any GPT and why they are very careful with how they structure information in the model to make rules. Right now copilot will give technically legal advice with a disclaimer, there’s no reason it wouldn’t do that only on that question if it was about legal advice or laws.

    • JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I noticed this back with Bing AI. Anytime you bring up anything related to nonliving sentience, it shuts down the conversation.

      • samus12345@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        It should say that you probably mean sapience, the ability to think, rather than sentience, the ability to sense things, then shut down the conversation.