英語翻譯練習(xí)——Lawyers Blame ChatGPT for Courtroom Error
Lawyers Blame ChatGPT for Courtroom（法庭） Error
律師將法庭上的錯(cuò)誤歸咎給 ChatGPT
Two lawyers responding to an angry judge in a New York court blamed ChatGPT for tricking them into including fictitious（虛構(gòu)的） legal research in a court filing（檔案）.
????????兩個(gè)律師為在紐約法庭上回應(yīng)憤怒的法官，把用含有虛構(gòu)法律研究的法庭文件欺騙他們這件事歸咎到 ChatGPT 上。
Attorneys Steven A. Schwartz and Peter LoDuca are facing possible punishment over a filing in a lawsuit against an airline that included references to past court cases that Schwartz thought were real, but were actually invented by the artificial intelligence-powered chatbot.
????????律師Steven A. Schwartz 和?Peter LoDuca 可能正面臨處罰在一場對一個(gè)航空公司的法律訴訟，包括涉及?Schwartz 認(rèn)為是真實(shí)，但事實(shí)上是由人工智能驅(qū)動的聊天機(jī)器人創(chuàng)造的過去的法庭案件。
Schwartz explained that he used the program as he looked for legal precedents（先例） supporting a client's case against the Colombian airline Avianca for an injury that happened on a 2019 flight.
????????Schwartz 解釋他使用這個(gè)程序作為尋找法律先例，以支持他對?Colombian airline Avianca 發(fā)生在2019年的航空損壞的客戶案件。
The chatbot, which has fascinated（入迷的，感興趣的） the world with its ability to answer prompts from users, suggested several cases that Schwartz hadn't been able to find through usual methods used at his law firm.
????????這個(gè)被世界所關(guān)注著的，能夠從使用者的提示詞來進(jìn)行回答的聊天機(jī)器人，提出了幾個(gè)?Schwartz 無法通過他的事務(wù)所使用的常規(guī)方法找到的案例。
The problem was, several of those cases weren't real or involved airlines that didn't exist.
????????這個(gè)問題在于，這幾個(gè)案件的不是真實(shí)的或者涉及的航空公司是不存在的。
"I did not comprehend that ChatGPT could fabricate（捏造） cases," Schwartz said.?"I would like to sincerely apologize," he added.
????????“我不清楚ChatGPT會捏造案例，”Schwartz 說?！拔蚁胍嬲\地道歉，”他補(bǔ)充道。
He said that he had suffered personally and professionally as a result and felt "embarrassed, humiliated and extremely remorseful（懊悔的）."
????????他說“我已經(jīng)遭受了個(gè)人和職業(yè)上的痛苦作為結(jié)果，我感到尷尬的，羞愧的，以及極度的懊悔?！?/strong>
He said that he and the firm where he worked had put safeguards in place to ensure nothing similar happens again.
????????他說他和他工作的公司已經(jīng)在適當(dāng)?shù)牡胤讲扇×税踩拇胧源_保不會有類似的事情再次發(fā)生。
Ronald Minkoff, an attorney for the law firm, told the judge that the submission was caused by "carelessness, not bad faith" and should not result in punishment.
????????Ronald Minkoff 這個(gè)法律公司的一個(gè)律師告訴這個(gè)法官，這次提交是由于粗心而非惡意，結(jié)果不應(yīng)該是處罰。
"Mr. Schwartz, someone who barely does federal research, chose to use this new technology. He thought he was dealing with a standard search engine," Minkoff said.?"What he was doing was playing with live ammo（實(shí)彈）."
????????“Schwartz 先生，一個(gè)做聯(lián)邦調(diào)查幾乎不使用新技術(shù)的人。他認(rèn)為他面對的是標(biāo)準(zhǔn)搜索引擎，”Minkoff 說，“他正在做的事是在玩弄實(shí)彈?！?/strong>
Daniel Shin, an adjunct professor（副教授） at the Center for Legal and Court Technology at William & Mary Law School, said that this is the first time that something like this has happened.?He added that this case "highlights the dangers of using promising AI technologies without knowing the risks."
????????在?William &?Mary 法律學(xué)院的法律和法庭技術(shù)中心的副教授?Daniel?Shin 說，這是第一次發(fā)生像這樣的事件。他補(bǔ)充道，這個(gè)案件 “強(qiáng)調(diào)了在不知道風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的情況下使用了有前途的AI技術(shù)的危險(xiǎn)”。
The judge said he'll rule on（對……做出裁決） punishments at a later date.
????????這個(gè)法官說他將會在一段日子后對處罰進(jìn)行裁決。
