How it is made should be irrelevant in the process.
No? If you are employed (or requested in this case I guess) to offer your expert opinion, the expert they want to hear from is you, not someone else you farm your work out to - whether that’s an LLM or another person
Interesting piece. Seems to be that the expert cannot falsify things but his opinion is an opinion. So there is no good/bad in that.
Not sure how it legally works, I think in the legal system at least in the US it is quite common that experts are hired and giving opinions based on who hires them?
And then the other party can cross examine? Not enough knowledge on that but it’s interesting if legal people could chime in on how it works.
I hope those expert “opinions” are not taken as facts?
How is this any different from any job? Or at least any knowledge worker job like an engineer or some sort? They hired you, so presumably they want you to do the work or solve the problem, not farm it out to another person or an LLM.
Does it matter how it was created? Whether you had a subordinate create it, or an employee, or a contractor, googled it, cited a study, or some other method. You as the expert look at the conclusion and either agree with it or disagree.
I think if people looked at LLM as just tools or interns, which you should always check or question their conclusions, then they'd 1) not believe everything LLMs tell you and 2) they would get better responses after critiquing the LLM response.
Comments
No? If you are employed (or requested in this case I guess) to offer your expert opinion, the expert they want to hear from is you, not someone else you farm your work out to - whether that’s an LLM or another person
Cynically, the purpose of the expert witness is someone to provide something which is treated as fact but isn't subject to penalties of perjury.
Interesting piece. Seems to be that the expert cannot falsify things but his opinion is an opinion. So there is no good/bad in that.
Not sure how it legally works, I think in the legal system at least in the US it is quite common that experts are hired and giving opinions based on who hires them?
And then the other party can cross examine? Not enough knowledge on that but it’s interesting if legal people could chime in on how it works.
I hope those expert “opinions” are not taken as facts?
How is this any different from any job? Or at least any knowledge worker job like an engineer or some sort? They hired you, so presumably they want you to do the work or solve the problem, not farm it out to another person or an LLM.
Does it matter how it was created? Whether you had a subordinate create it, or an employee, or a contractor, googled it, cited a study, or some other method. You as the expert look at the conclusion and either agree with it or disagree.
I think if people looked at LLM as just tools or interns, which you should always check or question their conclusions, then they'd 1) not believe everything LLMs tell you and 2) they would get better responses after critiquing the LLM response.