OpenAI ends legal and medical advice on ChatGPT

Can't wait for AI nutritionists to kill people on crash diets

Aka software engineers…

maybe that is why they opened the system to porn, as everything else will be soon gone.

I think it actually changed. I have a broken bone and have been consulting with ChatGPT (along with my doctor of course) for the last week. Last night it refused to give an opinion saying “ While I can’t give a medical opinion or formally interpret it”. First time I’d seen it object.

I understand the change but it’s also a shame. It’s been a fantastically useful tool for talking through things and educating myself.

I think one of the challenges is attribution. For example if you use Google search to create a fraudulent legal filing there aren't any of Google's fingerprints on the document. It gets reported as malpractice. Whereas reporting on these things is OpenAI or whatever AI is responsible. So even from the perspective of protecting a brand it's unavoidable. Suppose (no idea if true) the Louvre robbers wore Nike shoes and the reporting were that Nike shoes were used to rob the Louvre and all anyone talks about is Nike and how people need to be careful about what they do wearing Nike shoes.

It's like newsrooms took the advice that passive voice is bad form so they inject OpenAI as the subject instead.

Nah, this is to avoid litigation. Who needs lawsuits when you are seeking profit? 1 loss of a major lawsuit is horrible, there's the case of folks suing them because their loved ones committed suicide after chatting with ChatGPT. They are doing everything to avoid getting dragged to court.

> I'm well-aware that it's not a truth machine, and any output it provides should be verified, checked for references, and treated with due diligence.

You are, but that's not how AI is being marketed by OpenAI, Google, etc. They never mention, in their ads, how much the output needs to be double and triple checked. They say "AI can do what you want! It knows all! It's smarter than PhDs!". Search engines don't say "And this is the truth" in their results, which is not what LLM hypers do.

If they do that, they will be subject of regulations on medical devices. As they should be and means the end result will be less likely to promote complete crap then it is now.

>After it was diagnosed I walked an older version of chat gpt through our experience and it suggested my son’s issue as a possibility along with the correct diagnostic tool in just one back and forth.

Something I've noticed is that it's much easier to lead the LLM to the answer when you know when you want to go (even when the answer is factually wrong !), it doesn't have to be obvious leading but just framing the question in terms of mentioning all the symptoms you now know to be relevant in the order that's diagnosable, etc.

Not saying that's the case here, you might have gotten the correct answer first try - but checking my now diagnosed gastritis I got stuff from GERD to CRC depending on which symptoms I decide to stress and which events I emphasize in the history.

We are all obligated to hoard as many offline AI models as possible if the larger ones are legally restricted like this.

this is fresh news right? a friend just used chatgpt for medical advice last week (stuffed his wound with antibiotics after motorbike crash). are you saying you completely treated the congenital issue in this timeframe?

One wonders how exactly this will be enforced.

It would be terribly boring if it didn't. Just last night I had it walk me through reptile laws in my state to evaluate my business plan for a vertically integrated snapping turtle farm and turtle soup restaurant empire. Absurd, but it's fun to use for this kind of thing because it almost always takes you seriously.

(Turns out I would need permits :-( )