2.6 C
London
Sunday, February 5, 2023

Judges can be manipulated by Wikipedia articles, warns MIT study

Must read

Former aspiring assistant accuses George Santos of ethical violations and sexual harassment

Rep. George Santos, RN.Y., the freshman congressman accused of fabricating key parts of his resume, is accused of ethical violations and sexual harassment...

Google tries to reassure investors about AI’s progress while ChatGPT gives it a breath • londonbusinessblog.com

Google tried to reassure investors and analysts during its quarterly results on Thursday that it is still a leader in AI development. The...

Samooha launches with technology that enables companies to share data securely • londonbusinessblog.com

Samooha, a startup developing a “cross-cloud” data collaboration platform, today announced it has raised $12.5 million in a tranche of funding backed by Altimeter...

Brielle Barbusca- Wiki, age, height, net worth, boyfriend, ethnicity

Brielle Barbara is an American actress best known for her role as the onscreen daughter of Debra Messing in the American blockbuster series The...
Shreya Christinahttps://londonbusinessblog.com
Shreya has been with londonbusinessblog.com for 3 years, writing copy for client websites, blog posts, EDMs and other mediums to engage readers and encourage action. By collaborating with clients, our SEO manager and the wider londonbusinessblog.com team, Shreya seeks to understand an audience before creating memorable, persuasive copy.

Litigants could abuse Wikipedia to influence legal decisions, according to new research.

An investigation led by Neil Thompson of MIT’s Computer Science and AI Laboratory (CSAIL) found that judges previously cited legal cases that included a Wikipedia article.

The finding has raised concerns that court decisions are shaped by unreliable information. Wikipedia’s openness can also lead to legal statements being manipulated.

Greetings, Humanoids

Sign up for our newsletter now for a weekly roundup of our favorite AI stories delivered to your inbox.

“A well-equipped litigant might encourage his legal team to anonymously integrate their own analysis of a relevant precedent into a Wikipedia article early on in a trial, hoping to catch the attention of the judge or his clerk later on, Thompson said. TNW.

The case against Wikipedia

Wikipedia is quoted more and more in legal science and court decisions.

Busy judges use the site to keep up with developments in case law, but the shortcut is dangerous.

Wikipedia recognizes that not everything on the site is accurate, complete, or unbiased.