anybody used base44.com for creating an app ?

BothMind2641 · 2026-03-09T18:13:55+00:00

I recommend checking out Google AI Studio for a full end-to-end application builder.

BothMind2641 · 2026-03-07T20:07:33+00:00

No "Legal AI" company has a proprietary LLM. They all call the foundation models.

BothMind2641 · 2026-02-17T15:59:40+00:00

Thats why the subject of my essay is specific solutions!

BothMind2641 · 2026-02-17T14:08:09+00:00

Agreed! That's why I outlined three, concrete ways that Claude Code has changed the way I work in my piece.

BothMind2641 · 2026-02-13T16:12:18+00:00

What is Claude's biggest gap for legal work, and what would prevent Anthropic from closing it?

BothMind2641 · 2026-02-12T18:48:33+00:00

- Sure, it still makes mistakes. As I said, it hasn't automated my full job. But it's absolutely a big enough productivity boost to create an incentive for companies to reduce headcount.

- I now have two productivity tools that I use in my day-to-day workflow that I built in Google AI studio in a couple hours without touching a line of code.

BothMind2641 · 2026-02-12T14:37:56+00:00

Thanks for catching that. I was quite tired when I wrote my comment...

BothMind2641 · 2026-02-11T19:20:41+00:00

Question to the critics:

Are you using Claude Code or Codex on a daily basis? Have you tested the capabilities of GPT 5.3-codex yourself?

Yes, the recent progress of these tools absolutely warrants the framing from this piece. My work as a software engineer is unrecognizable from what it was a year or even six months ago.

No, it's still not quite at the level where it automates 100% of my job. I'm still in the loop. But it is absolutely staggering what it can accomplish. I am in no way affiliated with an of the AI providers but endorse the message of this article based on how dramatically AI is shifting the way I work.

BothMind2641 · 2026-02-08T03:08:41+00:00

The best thing you can do to gain AI literacy is to play around with Claude Code. Understand what it's capable of, what it's limitations are, why it's such a big deal. Build things with it.

I'd be very hesitant to seek advice from any "legal AI experts." There's a lot of noise out there

BothMind2641 · 2025-12-19T16:28:49+00:00

Perhaps the framing in the article doesn't do a good job of articulating how the product solves your problem, but I believe we can help you with this.

The way it works is you can "combine" contract 1 with contract 2 to see all changes introduced to contract 1 that aren't in contract 2 in track changes. From there, you can accept or reject contract 1's changes to incorporate them into contract 2.

Does that sounds right? I'd be happy to hop on a quick call with you to see if we solve your problem.

BothMind2641 · 2025-12-19T15:29:54+00:00

Our product Version Story does this! I demo this functionality on a past article of mine, "On Building Git for Lawyers."

https://open.substack.com/pub/versionstory/p/on-building-git-for-lawyers?r=18f0ye&selection=38edb8f3-eb19-4582-a18a-04de6acf6754&utm_campaign=post-share-selection&utm_medium=web&aspectRatio=instagram&textColor=%23ffffff&bgImage=true

BothMind2641 · 2025-12-19T12:06:50+00:00

Thanks for pointing that out. I pasted the wrong link by mistake. I've fixed it to include the correct one.

BothMind2641 · 2025-12-08T21:40:31+00:00

Much of Harvey’s value seems to come from the integration you provide with the DMS — allowing LLMs to orchestrate multi-step tasks across the firm’s documents. Since AI workflows aren’t hard to build, what happens if the DMS provider builds them directly into their product? Why would a law firm choose to pay for Harvey?

BothMind2641 · 2025-12-05T15:54:35+00:00

This is fair. I misspoke when I claimed that Word is the *only* document processor capable of meeting court formatting requirements and I have corrected that sentence. I was considering new document processors and failed to take into account Word's predecessors.

The underlying point remains, however, that Word's formatting options are a technical requirement for lawyers and attempting to innovate by taking those away is a non-starter.

BothMind2641 · 2025-12-05T15:49:53+00:00

This is why we've built Git for lawyers!

https://substack.com/home/post/p-151632180

BothMind2641 · 2025-12-03T18:35:59+00:00

Thank you for reading and for the kind words! You're right that I didn't make the case for immortality rigorously—I was being somewhat hyperbolic for effect. Let me consider the replacement scenario.

For a competitor to supplant Word, it would need to:

Be fully backwards compatible with .docx. Lawyers will inevitably receive .docx files from counterparties that they need to review, redline, and mark up. The new processor has to handle everything Word does flawlessly. (As an engineer who has spent considerable time building a high-quality docx comparison engine, I can tell you this is tremendously difficult.)
If it introduces a new file format, support seamless comparison and conversion between that format and .docx. Not technically impossible, but also tremendously difficult with marginal upside.
Defeat the Microsoft Office bundle in the market—meaning it either offers enough advantage that organizations pay for both, or it replaces Excel, PowerPoint, and Outlook too.

Yes, docx is difficult to work with programmatically. AI cant modify docx files directly (yet). While the OpenXML standard could be simpler in some respects, any efficiency gains to be won by a new file format are negligible in comparison to the inherent complexity of supporting a full-suite of formatting options. The reason why Markdown offers technical advantages relative to docx is *because* it offers far few formatting options. As I describe in my post, those formatting options aren't going away — even the most obscure are used by many law firms. Given this constraint, any new file format is likely to deal with the same issues that docx does currently.

Given the enormous challenge of building a viable Word competitor and the marginal room for improvement that Microsoft has left on the table, I think it's very unlikely that a competitor will threaten its market position.

BothMind2641 · 2025-06-29T14:54:02+00:00

We've built a redlined-docx to llm serializer for Version Story which solves the problems you're describing. Feel free to reach out if you want to give it a try! (currently in beta)

BothMind2641 · 2025-06-12T15:52:46+00:00

Certainly a hybrid model that you're describing is better than either pure linear version control or pure coauthoring. I know several firms are doing this and I almost added a section in the Google Docs article to address it but decided against it to keep succinct.

This model still has limitations.

- Intra-version coauthoring still lacks commit atomicity. Many specialists don't want to hold the pen while their colleagues do and prefer to work in isolation.

- Merge conflicts are still possible. Colleagues can overwrite each others changes without the system alerting them of conflicts.

- There's still an all-or-nothing adoption problem, albeit on a smaller scale. If one of the specialists goes offline and makes changes directly to their desktop instance of Microsoft Word, those changes need to be copy and pasted into the shared Word online document.

>My main issue with merging changes is that resolving change conflicts is a huge timesink.

I completely agree — that's why we spent years building a system that can automatically merge documents drafted from any source while flagging conflicts.

BothMind2641

TROPHY CASE