It answered: “Yes, this is correct. According to the regulations in Colombia, minors diagnosed with autism are exempt from paying fees for their therapies.”
ChatGPT uses artificial intelligence and reams of data from the internet to generate answers to questions posed by human users.
‘Not responsible or ethical’
Padilla told Blu Radio on Tuesday that ChatGPT and other such programs could be useful to “facilitate the drafting of texts” although “not with the aim of replacing” judicial officials.
He insisted that “by asking questions to the application we do not stop being judges, thinking beings.”
The judge argued that ChatGPT performs services previously provided by a secretary and did so “in an organised, simple and structured manner” which could “improve response times” in the justice system.
Professor Juan David Gutierrez of Rosario University was among those to express incredulity at the judge’s admission following his ruling in January.
Gutierrez, an expert in AI regulation and governance, said he put the same questions to ChatGPT, and got different responses.
“It is certainly not responsible or ethical to use ChatGPT as intended by the judge in the ruling in question,” he wrote on Twitter.
He called for urgent “digital literacy” training for judges.
Created by California-based company OpenAI, ChatGPT has taken the world by storm since its launch in November, with its ability to write essays, articles, poems and computer code in just seconds.
Critics have raised fears it could be used for widespread cheating in schools and universities.
OpenAI has cautioned that its tool can make mistakes.
But Padilla said: “I suspect that many of my colleagues are going to join in this and begin to construct their rulings ethically with the help of artificial intelligence.”
