> these attacks do not seem to be succeeding, even when a judge isn’t reviewing documents with his own eyes. Brazil’s AI system caught the hidden text before it was processed, Spader noted. And in Elliott’s case, prompts were “exposed, in each of those settings, the moment a human being actually looked at what the machine produced,” Spader said.
No, they don't. That was the author of the article using something the judge said in reference to AI court systems elsewhere and applying it to a case where it did not apply because no AI was in use.
There's a long post near the top of this comment section calling the article "garbage" because of this mistake.
