I have a lot of sympathy with the lawyer charged with contempt in this story. He used an LLM to summarise a proceedings and it made up nonsense. Most of us know that this is a risk, but I routinely talk to people who think an ‘AI summary’ of a document is going to be a distillation of information in the information in the source text, rather than some statistically probable sequence of words that would follow a request to summarise the source text. And that’s entirely because that’s precisely how these things are advertised.