5 ms·

I wouldn't blindly trust what a lawyer says either so there's no difference there.

by thallium205 3y ago

brk 3y ago
Sure, but you have a lot less personal risk following advice from a lawyer vs. advice from an LLM.
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  When your GPT is wrong, you will be laughed out of the room and sanctioned. When your attorney is wrong, you get to point at the attorney and show a good faith effort was made. Hacks are fun, just keep in mind the domain you're operating in.
  - giantg2 3y ago
    "When your attorney is wrong, you get to point at the attorney and show a good faith effort was made." And possibly sue their insurance to correct their mistakes.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - Scoundreller 3y ago
      But you’ll have to find a lawyer that specializes in suing lawyers and their own malpractice plans. Maybe that’s where legal AI will find the most demand.
    - kulikalov 3y ago
      Can't a tech firm running a "legal gpt" have an insurance?
      - toomuchtodo 3y ago
        Do they have a license to practice law?
      - giantg2 3y ago
        No. Malpractice insurance would be at the professional level. There could be lawyers using a legal chatGTP, but the professional liabilities would still be with the licensed professional.
        kulikalov 3y ago
        Well, I guess since it's not "practice" we gonna call it "mal-inference insurance".
      - freejazz 3y ago
        More legal malpractice? No, because they aren't attorneys and you cannot rely upon them for legal advice such that they'd be liable to you for providing subpar legal advice.
        kulikalov 3y ago
        Why? Because there's no word for "insurance of AI advise accuracy"? The whole point of progress is that we create something that is not a thing at the moment.
        freejazz 3y ago
        No, because, like I said, GPTs are not legally allowed to represent individuals, so they cannot obtain malpractice insurance. You can make up an entirely ancillary kind of insurance. It does not change the fact that GPTs are not legally allowed to represent clients, so they cannot be liable to clients for legal advice. Seeing as how you think GPTs are so useful here... why are you asking me these questions when a GPT should be perfectly capable of providing you with the policy considerations that underline attorney licensing procedures.
        giantg2 3y ago
- InsomniacL 3y ago
  What about if your lawyer is using chatgpt? :D https://www.forbes.com/sites/mollybohannon/2023/06/08/lawyer-used-chatgpt-in-court-and-cited-fake-cases-a-judge-is-considering-sanctions/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/mollybohannon/2023/06/08/lawyer...

I wouldn't blindly trust what a lawyer says either so there's no difference there.

brk 3y ago

Sure, but you have a lot less personal risk following advice from a lawyer vs. advice from an LLM.

toomuchtodo 3y ago
When your GPT is wrong, you will be laughed out of the room and sanctioned. When your attorney is wrong, you get to point at the attorney and show a good faith effort was made. Hacks are fun, just keep in mind the domain you're operating in.
- giantg2 3y ago
  "When your attorney is wrong, you get to point at the attorney and show a good faith effort was made." And possibly sue their insurance to correct their mistakes.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - Scoundreller 3y ago
    But you’ll have to find a lawyer that specializes in suing lawyers and their own malpractice plans. Maybe that’s where legal AI will find the most demand.
  - kulikalov 3y ago
    Can't a tech firm running a "legal gpt" have an insurance?
    - toomuchtodo 3y ago
      Do they have a license to practice law?
    - giantg2 3y ago
      No. Malpractice insurance would be at the professional level. There could be lawyers using a legal chatGTP, but the professional liabilities would still be with the licensed professional.
      - kulikalov 3y ago
        Well, I guess since it's not "practice" we gonna call it "mal-inference insurance".
    - freejazz 3y ago
      More legal malpractice? No, because they aren't attorneys and you cannot rely upon them for legal advice such that they'd be liable to you for providing subpar legal advice.
      - kulikalov 3y ago
        Why? Because there's no word for "insurance of AI advise accuracy"? The whole point of progress is that we create something that is not a thing at the moment.
        freejazz 3y ago
        No, because, like I said, GPTs are not legally allowed to represent individuals, so they cannot obtain malpractice insurance. You can make up an entirely ancillary kind of insurance. It does not change the fact that GPTs are not legally allowed to represent clients, so they cannot be liable to clients for legal advice. Seeing as how you think GPTs are so useful here... why are you asking me these questions when a GPT should be perfectly capable of providing you with the policy considerations that underline attorney licensing procedures.
      - giantg2 3y ago
InsomniacL 3y ago
What about if your lawyer is using chatgpt? :D https://www.forbes.com/sites/mollybohannon/2023/06/08/lawyer-used-chatgpt-in-court-and-cited-fake-cases-a-judge-is-considering-sanctions/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/mollybohannon/2023/06/08/lawyer...