121–130 of 174 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its a state created problem and you expect them to solve it? Private entities are the way these problems are always solved efficiently. Cant wait for lawyers to be obsolete personally.
So wait, lawyers are state entities?
Attorney here, I think it’s too early stages to run with this tech. It’s not just the confidentially incorrectness people have mentioned. If you ask it for legal citations for an argument, it makes them up because it has no concept of truth to filter on. Make all the jokes you want about lawyers stretching the truth, but citing State v. Johnson, (Minn. 2007) when that doesn’t exist is going to be bad for the individu…
Any insight on how the planes keep the Wi-Fi going? If the cell service internet provider’s handoff speed is too slow, does that mean they’re doing satellite internet in-flight? It was mentioned in the article that the tech has won some legal arguments regarding in-flight Wi-Fi refunds. (When the paid-for service didn’t work.)
Once this tech gets good, and everyone has access to a high-powered legal team for pennies, I am a little concerned that anyone will be able to DDoS the legal system. It's already possible for giant corporations to bury smaller actors in paperwork. They can and do crush people with this. What happens when everyone has this ability?
>The ultimate goal, according to Browder, is to democratize legal representation by making it free for those who can't afford it, in some cases eliminating the need for pricey attorneys. this is the core issue I have with companies and tech like this: they try to solve social issues with technology and business. the issue of accessible defense is an issue of institutional failure that rests on the shoulders of the st…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem with this is "how do you assure the AI isn't bold face lying to the defendant". For a natural text generation/chat system like ChatGPT, at the moment this is effectively impossible and frankly I don't see it being sufficiently fixed for something as complex as teaching law to a non-law-student any time in the near future.
I think these discussions always seem focused on the ideal state of the "AI is perfect and gives correct answers" and not the current state where the "AI constructs sentences that are structured correctly, but are filled with inaccuracies and illogical nonsense."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. Technology is the perfect solution for problems like these. So many societal issues today arise because systems developed centuries ago cannot keep up with a population that has grown exponentially since then. Tech's core feature is being able to scale. There will be more and more systemic reliance on automation and AI as time goes on, since that's the only sensible way out.
> So many societal issues today arise because systems developed centuries ago cannot keep up with a population that has grown exponentially since then. If you had 1 lawyer per 100 people in 1800 and you had 1 lawyer per 100 people today, I don't see a scaling problem with population. Indeed in the UK in 2012 there were 120,000 solicitors for 64 million Today it's 160,000 for 68 million That's a 30% increase in lawyer…
How many more laws are there? Being a lawyer is like 90% reading and collating documents to filter out relevant information. We have a lot more law and a lot more documentation to sift through these days.
>The ultimate goal, according to Browder, is to democratize legal representation by making it free for those who can't afford it, in some cases eliminating the need for pricey attorneys. this is the core issue I have with companies and tech like this: they try to solve social issues with technology and business. the issue of accessible defense is an issue of institutional failure that rests on the shoulders of the st…
I disagree. Technology is the perfect solution for problems like these. So many societal issues today arise because systems developed centuries ago cannot keep up with a population that has grown exponentially since then. Tech's core feature is being able to scale. There will be more and more systemic reliance on automation and AI as time goes on, since that's the only sensible way out.
>The ultimate goal, according to Browder, is to democratize legal representation by making it free for those who can't afford it, in some cases eliminating the need for pricey attorneys. this is the core issue I have with companies and tech like this: they try to solve social issues with technology and business. the issue of accessible defense is an issue of institutional failure that rests on the shoulders of the st…
How is this a social problem? Lawyers are expensive, because education takes time, motivation and competence. So it's an economical problem, something the state can't easily solve. Technology can make an impact here and sidestep or even ignore those problems.
The state can simplify the law and eliminate or stop prosecuting laws that don't directly harm people, thus reducing the demand for lawyers. It's not just an economical problem.