5 ms·

> I contend that it is already unethical for doctors/lawyers to NOT be utilizing LLM-like systems] Bah. I was working on an appellate matter recently that invo

> I contend that it is already unethical for doctors/lawyers to NOT be utilizing LLM-like systems] Bah. I was working on an appellate matter recently that involved some nuanced applications of well-known precedents. I tried to use GPT-4 to assist in exploring the issues, but I found it useless. It was unable to engage in a sophisticated discussion and instead preferred to speak in canned generalities. For what GPT-4 was offering, a quick trip to a bookmarked treatise on Westlaw would have been just as easy, and trustworthy.

ProllyInfamous 3y ago
Since early 2023, GPT-4 has been heavily nerfed (..."as a large language model"...), and is not niche-specific (in this case: legal training). Roberts is hinting at the future, one where trials and discovery are dominated with industry-specific datasets. >I tried to use GPT-4 to assist in exploring the issues, but I found it useless. These systems are mirrors, and you have yet to figure out the correct prompting. Once "PACER-AGI" becomes commercially-viable (IMHO, the major hold-up is liability from hallucinations), you will see an even-more-alarming rate of judicial redundancy.
- pests 3y ago
  > you have yet to figure out correctly promoting Nope, you're holding the phone wrong.
- anon373839 3y ago
  I actually work with LLMs extensively, and have been for several years now. I suspect domain adaptation could help here, but I am convinced that the issue I experienced is a more fundamental limitation: I don’t think this technology is inherently suited to the task of innovative logical analysis over novel issues. The same problem can be observed with programming tasks: LLMs can crank out accurate code to solve common problems, but they fail at truly original tasks. I suspect interpolation in the latent space just isn’t sufficient to do the job.
  - ProllyInfamous 3y ago
    My absolute agreement (with Roberts) is that legal research will be forever-changed. Most of the "innovative logical analysis over novel issues" that I have personally witnessed/directed/felt... has to do with comparing dead/living authors' POVs, between their fictional universes. Of course, this is a reflection of humanity, having elsewhere made such comparisons... but the ability to harness the patterns/connnections of just SO MANY unique POVs — is absolutely BEYOND HUMAN. -- Thanks for your informative perspective, and for sharing =D

ProllyInfamous 3y ago

Since early 2023, GPT-4 has been heavily nerfed (..."as a large language model"...), and is not niche-specific (in this case: legal training). Roberts is hinting at the future, one where trials and discovery are dominated with industry-specific datasets. >I tried to use GPT-4 to assist in exploring the issues, but I found it useless. These systems are mirrors, and you have yet to figure out the correct prompting. Once "PACER-AGI" becomes commercially-viable (IMHO, the major hold-up is liability from hallucinations), you will see an even-more-alarming rate of judicial redundancy.

pests 3y ago
> you have yet to figure out correctly promoting Nope, you're holding the phone wrong.
anon373839 3y ago
I actually work with LLMs extensively, and have been for several years now. I suspect domain adaptation could help here, but I am convinced that the issue I experienced is a more fundamental limitation: I don’t think this technology is inherently suited to the task of innovative logical analysis over novel issues. The same problem can be observed with programming tasks: LLMs can crank out accurate code to solve common problems, but they fail at truly original tasks. I suspect interpolation in the latent space just isn’t sufficient to do the job.
- ProllyInfamous 3y ago
  My absolute agreement (with Roberts) is that legal research will be forever-changed. Most of the "innovative logical analysis over novel issues" that I have personally witnessed/directed/felt... has to do with comparing dead/living authors' POVs, between their fictional universes. Of course, this is a reflection of humanity, having elsewhere made such comparisons... but the ability to harness the patterns/connnections of just SO MANY unique POVs — is absolutely BEYOND HUMAN. -- Thanks for your informative perspective, and for sharing =D