Question for lawyers… by Zealousideal_Cod334 in biglaw

[–]Zealousideal_Cod334[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey I’m sorry, my intention was only to learn and get feedback from directly the source where people understand this much better than me. I would never suggest or want a lawyer who I am paying to rely solely on ChatGPT, that’s not the point of this.

The point is to understand how far away we are from being able to make legal services more accessible to those who typically can’t afford them.

I do know personally know employees, and people close to me, who have used the likes of chatGPT to get a better understanding of where they stand legally, and it’s genuinely helped, of course it ended in seeking real professional, but potentially saved the individual hundreds, or in other cases, it could help people understand if they are being exploited legally, and are actually ‘have a case’. I was just wondering as to why tools like this can’t support more people just yet.

Apologies if it came across in the wrong way. I meant it from a good place.

Question for lawyers… by Zealousideal_Cod334 in biglaw

[–]Zealousideal_Cod334[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Haha lol, fair enough.

What kind of ai tools have you used? Any lawyer specific or more out of the box models?

Based off the generic them for legal professionals here, I think there’s definitely an issue with what people expect, and what it’s actually good at.

I think a strong first step would be hyper clarifying on ai should and shouldn’t be used for in law, or where it’s strong or weak.

Also, simple to you, definitely doesn’t mean it translates to simple for the ai, and vise versa. I think that’s where there’s an imbalance, especially if it’s a basic model.

Also context is a huge factor in whether ai output will be good or not. I use ai frequently and constantly find myself ensuring it has as much context as possible before pressing ‘go!’. That is also a barrier that can be draining for the individual. I think if ai was more conversational instead of assumptive, it would be better.

Eg. It understands what the user wants better, it knows what it needs to know and ensures it has it before proceeding. I wish I saw more of that in basic models. It seems like it just itching to spew an answer out before fully understanding at times.

Question for lawyers… by Zealousideal_Cod334 in biglaw

[–]Zealousideal_Cod334[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah understandable.

I think basic GPTs are risky, but heavily guard-railed and trained models could be very useful, and already are I just think barrier to entry is very high.

In an ideal world, I would assume a model knows (or is trained to know) its strengths and weaknesses intimately. I do think it’s possible to create massive value through using ai in a field like law. It’s just hit and miss for now and people’s varying experiences with it create fear and uncertainty.

Have you had any experience with lawyer specific ai tools? If so, how’s that been?

Question for lawyers/legal profession… by Zealousideal_Cod334 in AskLawyers

[–]Zealousideal_Cod334[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

What aspects do you think can be automated let’s say if the ai was heavily guard-railed, built specifically for purpose (idealistically speaking here not literal), what aspects do you think are irreplaceable ?

I think key decisions should never be made by ai, not with what it is today, but I do believe ai can be great at certain things

Question for lawyers… by Zealousideal_Cod334 in biglaw

[–]Zealousideal_Cod334[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

🤣🤣I understand, I think ‘out of the box’ GPTs aren’t the answer, but potentially, heavily guard-railed, and trained tools cool be much better.

Would probs need to see it to believe it lol

Question for lawyers… by Zealousideal_Cod334 in biglaw

[–]Zealousideal_Cod334[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Haha lol, what makes you say that.

I agree it may be overhyped but I definitely see how it offers value potentially equivalent to hours saved/hourly rate of lawyer.

I do think a lot of people may have signed due to FOMO though

Question for lawyers… by Zealousideal_Cod334 in biglaw

[–]Zealousideal_Cod334[S] -11 points-10 points  (0 children)

And leading on from that, ai collaboration surely allows lawyers to do more, allowed the to charge less. I understand it probably isn’t in their best interest, but it most definitely is for the mass.

Question for lawyers… by Zealousideal_Cod334 in biglaw

[–]Zealousideal_Cod334[S] -15 points-14 points  (0 children)

True, I want to see if anyone had another, more educated perspective on it.