government

nyc’s-government-chatbot-is-lying-about-city-laws-and-regulations

NYC’s government chatbot is lying about city laws and regulations

Close enough for government work? —

You can be evicted for not paying rent, despite what the “MyCity” chatbot says.

Has a government employee checked all those zeroes and ones floating above the skyline?

Enlarge / Has a government employee checked all those zeroes and ones floating above the skyline?

If you follow generative AI news at all, you’re probably familiar with LLM chatbots’ tendency to “confabulate” incorrect information while presenting that information as authoritatively true. That tendency seems poised to cause some serious problems now that a chatbot run by the New York City government is making up incorrect answers to some important questions of local law and municipal policy.

NYC’s “MyCity” ChatBot launched as a “pilot” program last October. The announcement touted the ChatBot as a way for business owners to “save … time and money by instantly providing them with actionable and trusted information from more than 2,000 NYC Business webpages and articles on topics such as compliance with codes and regulations, available business incentives, and best practices to avoid violations and fines.”

But a new report from The Markup and local nonprofit news site The City found the MyCity chatbot giving dangerously wrong information about some pretty basic city policies. To cite just one example, the bot said that NYC buildings “are not required to accept Section 8 vouchers,” when an NYC government info page says clearly that Section 8 housing subsidies are one of many lawful sources of income that landlords are required to accept without discrimination. The Markup also received incorrect information in response to chatbot queries regarding worker pay and work hour regulations, as well as industry-specific information like funeral home pricing.

Welcome news for people who think the rent is too damn high, courtesy of the MyCity chatbot.

Enlarge / Welcome news for people who think the rent is too damn high, courtesy of the MyCity chatbot.

Further testing from BlueSky user Kathryn Tewson shows the MyCity chatbot giving some dangerously wrong answers regarding the treatment of workplace whistleblowers, as well as some hilariously bad answers regarding the need to pay rent.

This is going to keep happening

The result isn’t too surprising if you dig into the token-based predictive models that power these kinds of chatbots. MyCity’s Microsoft Azure-powered chatbot uses a complex process of statistical associations across millions of tokens to essentially guess at the most likely next word in any given sequence, without any real understanding of the underlying information being conveyed.

That can cause problems when a single factual answer to a question might not be reflected precisely in the training data. In fact, The Markup said that at least one of its tests resulted in the correct answer on the same query about accepting Section 8 housing vouchers (even as “ten separate Markup staffers” got the incorrect answer when repeating the same question).

The MyCity Chatbot—which is prominently labeled as a “Beta” product—tells users who bother to read the warnings that it “may occasionally produce incorrect, harmful or biased content” and that users should “not rely on its responses as a substitute for professional advice.” But the page also states front and center that it is “trained to provide you official NYC Business information” and is being sold as a way “to help business owners navigate government.”

Andrew Rigie, executive director of the NYC Hospitality Alliance, told The Markup that he had encountered inaccuracies from the bot himself and had received reports of the same from at least one local business owner. But NYC Office of Technology and Innovation Spokesperson Leslie Brown told The Markup that the bot “has already provided thousands of people with timely, accurate answers” and that “we will continue to focus on upgrading this tool so that we can better support small businesses across the city.”

NYC Mayor Eric Adams touts the MyCity chatbot in an October announcement event.

The Markup’s report highlights the danger of governments and corporations rolling out chatbots to the public before their accuracy and reliability have been fully vetted. Last month, a court forced Air Canada to honor a fraudulent refund policy invented by a chatbot available on its website. A recent Washington Post report found that chatbots integrated into major tax preparation software provides “random, misleading, or inaccurate … answers” to many tax queries. And some crafty prompt engineers have reportedly been able to trick car dealership chatbots into accepting a “legally binding offer – no take backsies” for a $1 car.

These kinds of issues are already leading some companies away from more generalized LLM-powered chatbots and toward more specifically trained Retrieval-Augmented Generation models, which have been tuned only on a small set of relevant information. That kind of focus could become that much more important if the FTC is successful in its efforts to make chatbots liable for “false, misleading, or disparaging” information.

NYC’s government chatbot is lying about city laws and regulations Read More »

at-senate-ai-hearing,-news-executives-fight-against-“fair-use”-claims-for-ai-training-data

At Senate AI hearing, news executives fight against “fair use” claims for AI training data

All’s fair in love and AI —

Media orgs want AI firms to license content for training, and Congress is sympathetic.

WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 10: Danielle Coffey, President and CEO of News Media Alliance, Professor Jeff Jarvis, CUNY Graduate School of Journalism, Curtis LeGeyt President and CEO of National Association of Broadcasters, Roger Lynch CEO of Condé Nast, are strong in during a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law hearing on “Artificial Intelligence and The Future Of Journalism” at the U.S. Capitol on January 10, 2024 in Washington, DC. Lawmakers continue to hear testimony from experts and business leaders about artificial intelligence and its impact on democracy, elections, privacy, liability and news. (Photo by Kent Nishimura/Getty Images)

Enlarge / Danielle Coffey, president and CEO of News Media Alliance; Professor Jeff Jarvis, CUNY Graduate School of Journalism; Curtis LeGeyt, president and CEO of National Association of Broadcasters; and Roger Lynch, CEO of Condé Nast, are sworn in during a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law hearing on “Artificial Intelligence and The Future Of Journalism.”

Getty Images

On Wednesday, news industry executives urged Congress for legal clarification that using journalism to train AI assistants like ChatGPT is not fair use, as claimed by companies such as OpenAI. Instead, they would prefer a licensing regime for AI training content that would force Big Tech companies to pay for content in a method similar to rights clearinghouses for music.

The plea for action came during a US Senate Judiciary Committee hearing titled “Oversight of A.I.: The Future of Journalism,” chaired by Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, with Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri also playing a large role in the proceedings. Last year, the pair of senators introduced a bipartisan framework for AI legislation and held a series of hearings on the impact of AI.

Blumenthal described the situation as an “existential crisis” for the news industry and cited social media as a cautionary tale for legislative inaction about AI. “We need to move more quickly than we did on social media and learn from our mistakes in the delay there,” he said.

Companies like OpenAI have admitted that vast amounts of copyrighted material are necessary to train AI large language models, but they claim their use is transformational and covered under fair use precedents of US copyright law. Currently, OpenAI is negotiating licensing content from some news providers and striking deals, but the executives in the hearing said those efforts are not enough, highlighting closing newsrooms across the US and dropping media revenues while Big Tech’s profits soar.

“Gen AI cannot replace journalism,” said Condé Nast CEO Roger Lynch in his opening statement. (Condé Nast is the parent company of Ars Technica.) “Journalism is fundamentally a human pursuit, and it plays an essential and irreplaceable role in our society and our democracy.” Lynch said that generative AI has been built with “stolen goods,” referring to the use of AI training content from news outlets without authorization. “Gen AI companies copy and display our content without permission or compensation in order to build massive commercial businesses that directly compete with us.”

Roger Lynch, CEO of Condé Nast, testifies before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law during a hearing on “Artificial Intelligence and The Future Of Journalism.”

Enlarge / Roger Lynch, CEO of Condé Nast, testifies before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law during a hearing on “Artificial Intelligence and The Future Of Journalism.”

Getty Images

In addition to Lynch, the hearing featured three other witnesses: Jeff Jarvis, a veteran journalism professor and pundit; Danielle Coffey, the president and CEO of News Media Alliance; and Curtis LeGeyt, president and CEO of the National Association of Broadcasters.

Coffey also shared concerns about generative AI using news material to create competitive products. “These outputs compete in the same market, with the same audience, and serve the same purpose as the original articles that feed the algorithms in the first place,” she said.

When Sen. Hawley asked Lynch what kind of legislation might be needed to fix the problem, Lynch replied, “I think quite simply, if Congress could clarify that the use of our content and other publisher content for training and output of AI models is not fair use, then the free market will take care of the rest.”

Lynch used the music industry as a model: “You think about millions of artists, millions of ultimate consumers consuming that content, there have been models that have been set up, ASCAP, BMI, CSAC, GMR, these collective rights organizations to simplify the content that’s being used.”

Curtis LeGeyt, CEO of the National Association of Broadcasters, said that TV broadcast journalists are also affected by generative AI. “The use of broadcasters’ news content in AI models without authorization diminishes our audience’s trust and our reinvestment in local news,” he said. “Broadcasters have already seen numerous examples where content created by our journalists has been ingested and regurgitated by AI bots with little or no attribution.”

At Senate AI hearing, news executives fight against “fair use” claims for AI training data Read More »