3 ms·

Lawyers. I think AI can possibly replace lawyers, but the powerful people in society will do all they can to prevent it.

glial 3y ago
AI should replace lawyers, since they are essentially a regressive tax on engaging with the legal system.
- Buttons840 3y ago
  I agree. If access to the legal system becomes easy enough it will stress the system and get some parts of it fixed. Which is one reason I think lots of artificial barriers will prevent this from happening.
dmazzoni 3y ago
I do agree lawyers will always be needed. But, don't you think AI is already making lawyers dramatically more efficient? So much of what lawyers do is reading - reading possibly relevant case law, reading corporate communication. I met someone recently who has a law degree from a small no-name law school. He got mediocre grades. His job is sit in a room with 10 other lawyers, reading through every single document in a giant room full of filing cabinets. It's part of a corporate merger. It's going to take years to go through but they need lawyers to read through every single page looking for certain potential issues. That's the sort of thing I feel like will be eliminated.
red-iron-pine 3y ago
there will be a lawyer since they're licensed by the state bar, and to file certain things or do certain actions you need someone who can check the box, similar to formally certified medical or engineering workers. but a lot of law is review, of contracts, of statues, etc. and legal discovery companies are already a thing and were snagging a lot of marketshare before GPT exploded. "read each clause, identify weasel words, parties, and summarize each line or paragraph. then create a link to any relevant case law or statue for sanity checking" -- is already a thing. very little law actually happens via dramatic courtroom antics or powerful closing oration; most is summarizing things as mentioned above. just like how excel didn't eliminate accountants, but now instead of 10 you need 3, this will cut the already tight legal market down further.
buzzert 3y ago
Why would powerful people want to prevent lawyers from being replaced by AI? Wouldn't they rather not pay for expensive lawyers too? Or are you saying they somehow like paying for lawyers?

glial 3y ago

AI should replace lawyers, since they are essentially a regressive tax on engaging with the legal system.

Buttons840 3y ago
I agree. If access to the legal system becomes easy enough it will stress the system and get some parts of it fixed. Which is one reason I think lots of artificial barriers will prevent this from happening.

dmazzoni 3y ago

I do agree lawyers will always be needed. But, don't you think AI is already making lawyers dramatically more efficient? So much of what lawyers do is reading - reading possibly relevant case law, reading corporate communication. I met someone recently who has a law degree from a small no-name law school. He got mediocre grades. His job is sit in a room with 10 other lawyers, reading through every single document in a giant room full of filing cabinets. It's part of a corporate merger. It's going to take years to go through but they need lawyers to read through every single page looking for certain potential issues. That's the sort of thing I feel like will be eliminated.

red-iron-pine 3y ago

there will be a lawyer since they're licensed by the state bar, and to file certain things or do certain actions you need someone who can check the box, similar to formally certified medical or engineering workers. but a lot of law is review, of contracts, of statues, etc. and legal discovery companies are already a thing and were snagging a lot of marketshare before GPT exploded. "read each clause, identify weasel words, parties, and summarize each line or paragraph. then create a link to any relevant case law or statue for sanity checking" -- is already a thing. very little law actually happens via dramatic courtroom antics or powerful closing oration; most is summarizing things as mentioned above. just like how excel didn't eliminate accountants, but now instead of 10 you need 3, this will cut the already tight legal market down further.

buzzert 3y ago

Why would powerful people want to prevent lawyers from being replaced by AI? Wouldn't they rather not pay for expensive lawyers too? Or are you saying they somehow like paying for lawyers?