Local municipalities are so poorly run that I cannot help but wonder if the mundanities of a RLHF-aligned model is at all bad for the state from a pure legislative perspective.<p>Couple more thoughts:<p>1. It's not certain that what this world needs is a greater tangle of convoluted laws – ChatGPT inflating legislators' output seems like a net loss. The naive model-UN piece of me thinks that LLMs could help recontextualize political views and help lawmakers cross partisan divides.<p>2. LLMs are ironic in their utility in that their killer use case is summarization and, yet, they are incapable of critical reduction, ie "which laws should we get rid of?"
> Finegold said by phone on Wednesday that ChatGPT can help with some of the more tedious elements of the lawmaking process, including correctly and quickly searching and citing laws already on the books.<p>You'd really hope they double check the results, famously unlike the legal people who <i>didn't</i> a few months ago to bad effect.
What matters more if the output had the intent of the author, the idea and principle, surely?<p>Imagine 30 years ago, if it was revealed a grammar/spell-checker was used to improve a document, it would probably have had the same outrage.
Of course it's Porto Alegre lol. I was curious to see the text of the law [1], and it obviously looks fine - it's short and shows good command of "legalease". I'd love to see the prompt...<p>[1] <a href="https://dopaonlineupload.procempa.com.br/dopaonlineupload/4979_ce_454222_1.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://dopaonlineupload.procempa.com.br/dopaonlineupload/49...</a>