[ceh123]

Presenting false data to investors is fraud, doesn't matter how it was generated. In fact, humans are quite good at "generating plausible looking data", doesn't mean human generated spreadsheets are fraud.

On the other hand, presenting truthful data to investors is distinctly not fraud, and this again does not depend on the generation method.

[alfalfasprout]

If humans "generate plausible looking data" despite any processes to ensure data quality they've likely engaged in willful fraud.

An LLM doing so needn't even be willful from the author's part. We're going to see issues with forecasts/slide decks full of inaccuracies that are hard to review.

[ceh123]

I think my main point is just because an LLM can lie, doesn’t necessarily mean an LLM generated slide is fraud. It could very easily be correct and verified/certified by the accountant and not fraud. Just cuz the text was generated first by an LLM doesn’t mean fraud.

That being said, oh for sure this will lead to more incidental fraud (and deliberate fraud) and I’m sure it already has. Would be curious to see the prevalence of em-dash’s in 10k’s over the years.

[lionkor]

> doesn't matter how it was generated

is there precedent for this supposed ruling?

[ceh123]

US v Simon 1969, see [0] for a review.

Establishes that accountants who certify financials are liable if they are incorrect. In particular, if they have a reason to believe they might not be accurate and they certify anyway they are liable. And at this stage of development it’s pretty clear that you need to double check LLM generated numbers.

Obviously no clue if this would hold up with today’s court, but I also wasn’t making a legal statement before. I’m not a lawyer and I’m not trying to pretend to be one.

[0] https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?arti...