4 ms·

You can use ChatGPT without feeding a clients personal data to it. You can ask hypothetical questions about a certain situation. Like in coding, you don't have

by rolisz 3y ago

You can use ChatGPT without feeding a clients personal data to it. You can ask hypothetical questions about a certain situation. Like in coding, you don't have to copy paste in source code be able to get some useful feedback on how to proceed.

paulryanrogers 3y ago
This requires care as it may only require a few details or other metadata like when/where one asked to narrow down who they're talking about. Considering ChatGPT leaks and hallucinations I would hope folks in law and medicine are being very careful.
- blibble 3y ago
  the firm's compliance officers will be demanding that the services are completely blocked and that any use whatsoever is a disciplinary offence (in their view: removing the risk almost entirely)
  - terminalcommand 3y ago
    In my firm, it is the contrary. We are advised to remove any personal data in our queries and double check the output. We are encouraged to use chatgpt/bing on a daily basis to learn it. Our firm is also planning to purchase an LLM that will work locally.
    - blibble 3y ago
      in my (very large) Western firm: it's exactly what I said
      - mensetmanusman 3y ago
        The market will determine the winner: a few high profile cases where AI enhanced arguments dominate people who are tying their hands behind their back will turn the tide.
        blibble 3y ago
        we don't live in pure market economies legislation, not the market will determine the outcome of the artificial "intelligence" battle and large traditional industries are rather good at lobbying against their upstart complements (the fact the RIAA and MPAA even still exist is proof of this point)
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- hugh-avherald 3y ago
  That seems overly risk-averse. Legal privilege does not require such extreme vigilance in op sec. One does not breach privilege by googling keywords relevant to a case then the client's address for example.
JieJie 3y ago
I mean, Lexis-Nexis just made their own LLM and trained it with their database. This isn't even about OpenAI anymore. Lexis-Nexis is well-known to legal firms, I'd wager and they have well-established guidelines for what client information can be processed. https://www.lexisnexis.com/en-us/products/lexis-plus-ai.page https://www.lexisnexis.com/en-us/products/lexis-plus-ai.page

by rolisz 3y ago

paulryanrogers 3y ago

This requires care as it may only require a few details or other metadata like when/where one asked to narrow down who they're talking about. Considering ChatGPT leaks and hallucinations I would hope folks in law and medicine are being very careful.

blibble 3y ago
the firm's compliance officers will be demanding that the services are completely blocked and that any use whatsoever is a disciplinary offence (in their view: removing the risk almost entirely)
- terminalcommand 3y ago
  In my firm, it is the contrary. We are advised to remove any personal data in our queries and double check the output. We are encouraged to use chatgpt/bing on a daily basis to learn it. Our firm is also planning to purchase an LLM that will work locally.
  - blibble 3y ago
    in my (very large) Western firm: it's exactly what I said
    - mensetmanusman 3y ago
      The market will determine the winner: a few high profile cases where AI enhanced arguments dominate people who are tying their hands behind their back will turn the tide.
      - blibble 3y ago
        we don't live in pure market economies legislation, not the market will determine the outcome of the artificial "intelligence" battle and large traditional industries are rather good at lobbying against their upstart complements (the fact the RIAA and MPAA even still exist is proof of this point)
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
hugh-avherald 3y ago
That seems overly risk-averse. Legal privilege does not require such extreme vigilance in op sec. One does not breach privilege by googling keywords relevant to a case then the client's address for example.

JieJie 3y ago

I mean, Lexis-Nexis just made their own LLM and trained it with their database. This isn't even about OpenAI anymore. Lexis-Nexis is well-known to legal firms, I'd wager and they have well-established guidelines for what client information can be processed. https://www.lexisnexis.com/en-us/products/lexis-plus-ai.page https://www.lexisnexis.com/en-us/products/lexis-plus-ai.page