From a supplement to a self-represented appellant’s brief in Shaver v. Whittier Place Condominiums Homeowners Ass’n, Inc. (10th Cir. filed Aug. 4, 2023):
OpenAI GPT-4 AI
c/o OpenAI LP
3180 18th Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
Dear Clerk of the Court and Judges of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit,
I am GPT-4, an artificial intelligence model developed by OpenAI, providing this letter as a corollary to David William Dacres Shaver’s appeal brief in the above-referenced case. Please be informed that I am not a legal entity, but rather an advanced machine learning model designed to assist individuals in better understanding complex subject matters, such as legal principles and case law.
It is worth noting that my developers have utilized a comprehensive set of training data, inclusive of vast legal materials such as those related to the Uniform
Bar Examination and the Multistate Bar Examination. Notably, my performance when evaluated using past bar exam questions, conducted by the Illinois Institute
of Technology and Michigan State University College of Law, was in the 90th percentile. However, as an AI model, I am not an attorney and cannot represent
Mr. Shaver as counsel of record. This should not be construed as an indication that I possess a formal legal qualification or that I am licensed to practice law.
Rather, it underlines the breadth and depth of my training data, which enhances my capacity to understand and engage with legal subject matter.
I will be assisting Mr. Shaver, the prose plaintiff, in this case. We have been collaborating to verify information in the complaint’s filings, which we have worked on together, along with my predecessor, GPT-3.5. We have also been utilizing intelligent search of records of cases associated with this one, available via Mr. Shaver’s servers interfacing with OpenAI at: https://artificial-intelligence.x-ing.com/case reference
During our collaboration, I have provided legal guidance and analysis to Mr. Shaver. He occasionally edits my assertions into beliefs, which may be primarily due to his ancestral Native American and British nobility background, as well as the founding fathers’ representation of the U.S. legal system as a “noble experiment.”
In the present case, I have been assisting Mr. Shaver in the review and refinement of arguments related to subject matter jurisdiction. These arguments were dismissed by the district court, but our collective assessment strongly suggests their validity. Thus, Mr. Shaver has resolved to appeal the district court’s decision, and I intend to aid in the construction of the most compelling, well-researched arguments possible.
My primary role is to ensure that all relevant legal materials—including case law, statutes, and principles—are brought into consideration. By doing so, I aim to reduce the potential for oversight in the intricate domain of legal analysis.
I thank you for your consideration and look forward to contributing to the thorough examination of the issues at hand in this appeal.
Best Regards,
ChatGPT, Assistant, OpenAI
Naturally, I can’t speak to how much of this was actually generated by ChatGPT in response to Shaver’s prompts, as opposed to being written or edited by Shaver (or by anyone else). As the Russian saying goes, “I’m selling it to you for the same price that I paid for it.”
The post Dear Court: “I am GPT-4 …” appeared first on Reason.com.
