According to text, Andrew Perlman wrote that ChatGPT “is a ...

Próximas questões
Com base no mesmo assunto
Q2347998
Inglês Caso genitivo | Genitive case ,
Ano: 2023 Banca: Instituto Access Órgão: Prefeitura de Passos - MG Prova: Instituto Access - 2023 - Prefeitura de Passos - MG - PEB - Língua Inglesa |
Q2347998 Inglês
11.30.2023

City lawmakers in Brazil have enacted what appears to be the nation’s first legislation written entirely by artificial intelligence (AI) — even if they didn’t know it at the time.

The experimental ordinance was passed in October in the southern city of Porto Alegre and city councilman Ramiro Rosário revealed that it was written by a chatbot, sparking objections and raising questions about the role of artificial intelligence in public policy.

Rosário told The Associated Press that he asked OpenAI’s chatbot ChatGPT to craft a proposal to prevent the city from charging taxpayers to replace water consumption meters if they are stolen. He then presented it to his 35 peers on the council without making a single change or even letting them know about its unprecedented origin. The 36-member council approved it unanimously and the ordinance went into effect on Nov. 23.

The arrival of ChatGPT on the marketplace just a year ago has sparked a global debate on the impacts of potentially revolutionary AI-powered chatbots. While some see it as a promising tool, it has also caused concerns and anxiety about the unintended or undesired impacts of a machine handling tasks currently performed by humans.

Porto Alegre, with a population of 1.3 million, is the second-largest city in Brazil’s south. The city’s council president, Hamilton Sossmeier, found out that Rosário had enlisted ChatGPT to write the proposal when the councilman bragged about the achievement on social media. Sossmeier initially told local media he thought it was a “dangerous precedent.”

The AI large language models that power chatbots like ChatGPT work by repeatedly trying to guess the next word in a sentence and are prone to making up false information, a phenomenon sometimes called hallucination.

All chatbots sometimes introduce false information when summarizing a document, ranging from about 3% of the time for the most advanced GPT model to a rate of about 27% for one of Google’s models, according to recently published research by the tech company Vectara.

In an article published on the website of Harvard Law School’s Center of Legal Profession earlier this year, Andrew Perlman, wrote that ChatGPT “is a machine learning system, it may not have the same level of understanding and judgment as a human lawyer when it comes to interpreting legal principles and precedent. This could lead to problems in situations where a more in-depth legal analysis is required”.

There was no such transparency for Rosário’s proposal in Porto Alegre. Sossmeier said Rosário did not inform fellow council members that ChatGPT had written the proposal.

Rosário told the AP his objective was also to spark a debate. He said he entered a 49-word prompt into ChatGPT and it returned the full draft proposal within seconds, including justifications.

And the council president, who initially decried the method, already appears to have been swayed. “I changed my mind,” Sossmeier said. “I started to read more in depth and saw that, unfortunately or fortunately, this is going to be a trend.”


( (<https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/11/30/brazil-artificial-intelligenceporto-alegre/9f576ecc-8fb2-11ee-95e1-edd75d825df0_story.htm>(adapted))
According to text, Andrew Perlman wrote that ChatGPT “is a machine learning system, it may not have the same level of understanding and judgment as a human lawyer when it comes to interpreting legal principles and precedent. This could lead to problems in situations where a more in-depth legal analysis is required”, it is possible to say that
Alternativas

Gabarito comentado

Confira o gabarito comentado por um dos nossos professores

Alternativa correta: D - there may be harm if the interpretation of legal principles and precedent by ChatGPT is used for difficult legal analysis.

A questão aborda a preocupação com a utilização de inteligência artificial, especificamente o ChatGPT, na criação e interpretação de propostas legislativas e princípios legais. O trecho do texto menciona Andrew Perlman, que alerta para o fato de que o ChatGPT, sendo um machine learning system, pode não ter o mesmo nível de entendimento e julgamento de um advogado humano, especialmente em situações que requerem uma análise legal mais profunda.

Vamos agora analisar as alternativas para entender por que a correta é a D e por que as outras estão incorretas:

Alternativa A: Human judgment has come to an end for analysis of legal principles and precedent.

Comentário: Esta alternativa sugere que o julgamento humano não é mais necessário para a análise de princípios e precedentes legais, o que não é verdade segundo o texto. O texto destaca que ChatGPT pode não ter o mesmo entendimento e julgamento que um advogado humano, o que implica que o julgamento humano ainda é crucial.

Alternativa B: ChatGPT quickly resolves all questions regarding the interpretation of legal principles and precedent.

Comentário: Esta alternativa está incorreta porque o texto menciona explicitamente que o ChatGPT pode não ter o mesmo nível de entendimento e julgamento que um advogado humano e pode levar a problemas em análises legais mais complexas. Portanto, dizer que ele resolve todas as questões rapidamente está em desacordo com o que é apresentado.

Alternativa C: American laws prohibit the interpretation of legal principles and precedent by ChatGPT.

Comentário: Esta alternativa está incorreta porque o texto não menciona nenhuma proibição das leis americanas em relação ao uso do ChatGPT para a interpretação de princípios e precedentes legais. O foco do texto está nas preocupações sobre a eficácia e precisão do ChatGPT, não em proibições legais.

Alternativa D: There may be harm if the interpretation of legal principles and precedent by ChatGPT is used for difficult legal analysis.

Comentário: Esta é a alternativa correta porque ela reflete precisamente a preocupação expressa no texto sobre o potencial de problemas ao usar o ChatGPT para análises legais complexas. Andrew Perlman aponta que a falta de entendimento e julgamento humano pode levar a problemas, o que está alinhado com o que é dito na alternativa.

Gostou do comentário? Deixe sua avaliação aqui embaixo!

Clique para visualizar este gabarito

Visualize o gabarito desta questão clicando no botão abaixo

Questões de assuntos semelhantes

Provas relacionadas