Posting GPT answers on Law Stack Exchange is temporarily banned.
This policy has been adopted from Stack Overflow's current stance to give us time to work out our own. Most of the arguments for and against the use of AI generated content for coding questions are equally applicable to legal questions.
The Stack Overflow reasons are quoted below and, yes, we know there is not a one-to-one correspondence between their experience and ours. For example, while we are not (yet) receiving the volume of AI answers that Stack Exchange is, we have had one user account where all their answers are believed to have been AI generated.
Please see the Help Center article: Why posting GPT and ChatGPT generated answers is not currently acceptable
This is a temporary policy intended to slow down the influx of answers and other content created with ChatGPT. What the final policy will be regarding the use of this and other similar tools is something that will need to be discussed with Stack Overflow staff and, quite likely, here on Meta Law Stack Exchange.
Overall, because the average rate of getting correct answers from ChatGPT is too low, the posting of answers created by ChatGPT is substantially harmful to the site and to users who are asking and looking for correct answers.
The primary problem is that while the answers which ChatGPT produces have a high rate of being incorrect, they typically look like they might be good and the answers are very easy to produce. There are also many people trying out ChatGPT to create answers, without the expertise or willingness to verify that the answer is correct prior to posting. Because such answers are so easy to produce, a large number of people are posting a lot of answers. The volume of these answers (thousands) and the fact that the answers often require a detailed read by someone with at least some subject matter expertise in order to determine that the answer is actually bad has effectively swamped our volunteer-based quality curation infrastructure.
As such, we need to reduce the volume of these posts and we need to be able to deal with the ones which are posted quickly, which means dealing with users, rather than individual posts.
So, for now, the use of ChatGPT to create posts here on Stack Overflow is not permitted. If a user is believed to have used ChatGPT after the posting of this temporary policy, sanctions will be imposed to prevent them from continuing to post such content, even if the posts would otherwise be acceptable.
NOTE: While the above text focuses on answers, because that's where we're experiencing the largest volume of such content, the ban applies to all content on Stack Overflow, except each user's profile content (e.g. your "About me" text).
We have to decide the policy for our site for ourselves
At present, the Stack Exchange policy is to allow each site to craft their own response to ChatGPT and other AI Q&A.
This is the current word from on high (in response to a discussion titled Ban ChatGPT network-wide):
With due consideration, we've decided no general policy is necessary or helpful at this time. I want to be clear: I am not in any way intending to downplay the significance of ChatGPT, nor the disruption it has caused to the platform over the last few weeks.
Instead, we're going to stand by the comment I left on this post on December 5th:
While we evaluate, we hope that folks on network sites feel comfortable establishing per-site policies responsive to their communities’ needs.
Each site on the network is going to be impacted by ChatGPT (and its future iterations) in different ways. Of all the sites on the network, Stack Overflow was hit by far the hardest. However, we are measuring its impact both on Stack Overflow and across the network -- and, the impact of ChatGPT is currently diminishing everywhere. Some sites will see more or less activity on a given day, but outside Stack Overflow, it appears to be leveling off to a very slow trickle. On Stack Overflow, its usage rate is still falling quickly.
Because sites are impacted to such different degrees by the usage of ChatGPT, we encourage sites to create these policies as they become an issue. A blanket policy does no good if affected communities are not simultaneously developing the methods they use to combat the material problems they face. Instead, it risks being actively unproductive, by setting an expectation that sites will purge this content without giving them targeted tools to do so.
Our work internally progresses on identifying these posts and making our systems more resilient to issues like this in the future. We recognize that this is a shot across the bow, and the problem isn't going to go away in the long term. But for now, it seems we've weathered this storm mostly intact. As always, we'll reevaluate this decision in the future, if the circumstances warrant it.
And, of course, if any site experiences a volume of GPT posts that are cumbersome to manage, or a site needs any other support managing an influx of unwanted content, we are always happy to help apply the tools we have at our disposal.
This is a list of how other sites are responding.