Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

An AI lawyer was set to argue in court – real lawyers shut it down

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 708 posts

Re: An AI lawyer was set to argue in court – real lawyers shut it down

#91

Post by RandomLensman »

aaaaaA3 wrote: post #87
RandomLensman wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the need to use an expert the issue or rather the price point? Why would it be wrong to avail yourself of someone else's expertise (and people use lawyers in non-case law jurisdictions, too)? Not sure anyone really would want to operate on themselves (because the need for a surgeon in an important event in their life is somehow "wrong").

>Not sure anyone really would want to operate on themselves (because the need for a surgeon in an important event in their life is somehow "wrong"). Not operate, but since over here in Europe just about any piece of paper passes as a prescription, I tend to print my own. (Most people don't know this, but EU pharmacies are required to accept prescriptions from other EU countries. There's no standard format or verifica…

Pretty sure, sometimes a doctor might know more than you on a prescription or their educated guess on which antibiotic is appropriate is better than yours, for example.

Re: An AI lawyer was set to argue in court – real lawyers shut it down

#92

Post by matheusmoreira »

sitkack wrote: post #39
charcircuit wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does failing to get rid of a traffic ticket ruin someone's life?

Unpaid traffic tickets are probably many people's gateway to their first arrest warrant. Then once in the system it is hard to escape. It is a real thing. https://brunolaw.com/resources/general-criminal-law/what-to-... Then once this process starts you automatically get * Suspended driver’s license * Ineligible to renew your driver’s license * Ineligible to register your vehicle * Vehicle being towed and impounded *…

In what countries do unpaid parking tickets justify arrest warrants? That's seriously insane.

Re: An AI lawyer was set to argue in court – real lawyers shut it down

#93

Post by rcme »

NoboruWataya wrote: post #84
rcme wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because the need for a surgeon in an important event in their life is somehow "wrong" Most countries try to guarantee access to a surgeon when one is needed.

Most countries also give you a lawyer if you need it, no? Like, you get public defenders in the US?

Not for civil cases. And the reputation of public defenders for criminal cases is not particularly good.

Re: An AI lawyer was set to argue in court – real lawyers shut it down

#94

Post by pjc50 »

rcme wrote: post #18
PostOnce wrote: post #2

You can't just start practicing law without a license, you'll ruin somebody's life; they'll assume you, or the computer, knows what is going on, when in fact you just want Free Dollars. I don't want Dr. iPad Joe who spent a grand total of 15 minutes learning how to use ChatGPT making legal, medical, engineering, or other important decisions for me or the place I live. Now, I am of course free to use ChatGPT as a priv…

I find the need for lawyers a tragedy. Interactions with the judicial system are often some of the most important events in a person’s life. The fact that it’s necessary to pay someone hundreds or thousands of dollars an hour to help navigate the arcane process is sad and shouldn’t be necessary. It would be one thing if laws were meaningfully written down, so that anyone could read the statutes and build their own ar…

This is a tricky situation, but it seems like it should be possible if structured as a "McKenzie friend": https://www.legalchoices.org.uk/types-of-lawyers/other-lawye... / https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McKenzie_friend

Re: An AI lawyer was set to argue in court – real lawyers shut it down

#95

Post by NoboruWataya »

ActorNightly wrote: post #31
PostOnce wrote: post #2

You can't just start practicing law without a license, you'll ruin somebody's life; they'll assume you, or the computer, knows what is going on, when in fact you just want Free Dollars. I don't want Dr. iPad Joe who spent a grand total of 15 minutes learning how to use ChatGPT making legal, medical, engineering, or other important decisions for me or the place I live. Now, I am of course free to use ChatGPT as a priv…

Except this aint it. "The person challenging a speeding ticket would wear smart glasses that both record court proceedings and dictate responses into the defendant's ear from a small speaker. The system relied on a few leading AI text generators, including ChatGPT and DaVinci." I.e its equivalent of a person effectively studying the actual law and then representing themselves in court, just in a more optimal manner.…

> I.e its equivalent of a person effectively studying the actual law and then representing themselves in court, just in a more optimal manner.

It's not equivalent at all. ChatGPT and DaVinci have not "studied the law" in the same way as any human would.

> If law firms believed it was bullshit, they would just put a very good attorney on that case and disprove it. Barring it from entry with threat of jailtime pretty much proves that they are full of shit and they know it.

This is a traffic ticket case. He's not up against Sullivan & Cromwell, he's up against some local prosecutor. I'm sure if some white shoe law firm were being paid hundreds of thousands to defend a case against a guy using ChatGPT, they'd be fine with it.

Even though we have an adversarial system, the state can't just let ordinary folk hang themselves with cheap half-baked "solutions". It would be unjust/bad press (delete as appropriate to your level of cynicism). That's why we have licensing requirements, etc.

Re: An AI lawyer was set to argue in court – real lawyers shut it down

#96

Post by aaaaaA3 »

RandomLensman wrote: post #91
aaaaaA3 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Not sure anyone really would want to operate on themselves (because the need for a surgeon in an important event in their life is somehow "wrong"). Not operate, but since over here in Europe just about any piece of paper passes as a prescription, I tend to print my own. (Most people don't know this, but EU pharmacies are required to accept prescriptions from other EU countries. There's no standard format or verifica…

Pretty sure, sometimes a doctor might know more than you on a prescription or their educated guess on which antibiotic is appropriate is better than yours, for example.

Hey, I definitely agree.

On the other hand, every time I've gone to the doctor with a cold, I've always been prescribed the same antibiotic after basically no examination.

If I had some new, unexpected symptoms, I'd probably want to at least call the doctor.

Re: An AI lawyer was set to argue in court – real lawyers shut it down

#97

Post by UncleEntity »

charcircuit wrote: post #6
PostOnce wrote: post #2

You can't just start practicing law without a license, you'll ruin somebody's life; they'll assume you, or the computer, knows what is going on, when in fact you just want Free Dollars. I don't want Dr. iPad Joe who spent a grand total of 15 minutes learning how to use ChatGPT making legal, medical, engineering, or other important decisions for me or the place I live. Now, I am of course free to use ChatGPT as a priv…

How does failing to get rid of a traffic ticket ruin someone's life?

I used to drive a cab and people would tell me why they were in the cab quite often.

My favorite was this guy who got a ticket on a bicycle for not having a headlight, moved out of state and ten years later had his car impounded for driving without a license because they apparently suspended it for getting (or, more correctly, not paying) a ticket he got on a bicycle.

I’m guessing he never tried changing his license to the new state because Arizona licenses are good until you’re 65.

Re: An AI lawyer was set to argue in court – real lawyers shut it down

#98

Post by roenxi »

rcme wrote: post #18
PostOnce wrote: post #2

You can't just start practicing law without a license, you'll ruin somebody's life; they'll assume you, or the computer, knows what is going on, when in fact you just want Free Dollars. I don't want Dr. iPad Joe who spent a grand total of 15 minutes learning how to use ChatGPT making legal, medical, engineering, or other important decisions for me or the place I live. Now, I am of course free to use ChatGPT as a priv…

I find the need for lawyers a tragedy. Interactions with the judicial system are often some of the most important events in a person’s life. The fact that it’s necessary to pay someone hundreds or thousands of dollars an hour to help navigate the arcane process is sad and shouldn’t be necessary. It would be one thing if laws were meaningfully written down, so that anyone could read the statutes and build their own ar…

Professional advocates aren't a result of any specific legal system - if I'm at risk of having my life's savings and achievements summarily destroyed then I want someone of waaaaay above average verbal and emotional intelligence, who is thinking clearly and not under any pressure themselves, explaining why that shouldn't happen.

There is a problem where the laws so complex and numerous it is no longer practical to understand them or follow them all. People have a bias and don't seem very good at separating "good idea in the current context" from "thing that should be legally required". Let alone navigating the complexity of the phrase "cost benefit analysis". Anyone who lives life while obeying all laws to the letter is at a serious disadvantage to the average human - although since it is impossible to know what all the laws are it is unlikely anyone could do this.

But that arcanery isn't what drives the need for lawyers. You'd have to be crazy to engage with something as powerful and erratic as a legal system on your own. And crazy people do frequently represent themselves already.

Re: An AI lawyer was set to argue in court – real lawyers shut it down

#99

Post by mandmandam »

smorrebrod wrote: post #68
dubcanada wrote: post #44

I always found lawyers to be interesting… they are not responsible for you. They help guide you and argue for your case. But if they mess up, that doesn’t send them to jail. You can fire them or report them. But that’s it. You’re still screwed. Really the only one in the court working for you, is yourself. So ideally we’d make it easier to represent yourself. As long as your capable of doing such. I quite like this i…

I don't know if that's what you're talking about but you can sue your lawyer for professional negligence if they didn't do their job properly.

This isn't quite true.

You can only sue for negligence if you can prove you were going to win without the negligence. And it will cost you ten thousand dollars just to begin the process.

So if there's any doubt that you're going to win - any at all - your own $600/hr lawyer can flat out fuck you over. And there isn't a fucking thing you can do about it.

Re: An AI lawyer was set to argue in court – real lawyers shut it down

#100

Post by jiggywiggy »

db48x wrote: post #71
rcme wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find the need for lawyers a tragedy. Interactions with the judicial system are often some of the most important events in a person’s life. The fact that it’s necessary to pay someone hundreds or thousands of dollars an hour to help navigate the arcane process is sad and shouldn’t be necessary. It would be one thing if laws were meaningfully written down, so that anyone could read the statutes and build their own ar…

In part I understand what you mean. I think it is extremely important that courtroom procedure doesn’t get so complex that it is impossible for an individual to cope with. In practice a lot of judges go out of their way to make self–representation possible. However, I don’t think that having professional lawyers represents a tragedy. Specialization is very important, and we would all be worse off without it. Teaching…

Yeah but the rules that govern our lives in society shouldn't need a phd to understand.

There are often daily situations where both citizens and police don't know really know what the law is.

Reform is proven to be really hard. But that's the tragedy.

For instance taxes shouldn't really be more complicated then filling in a simple automated form. Also for businesses. And it should really be the burden of the government taxing that it's all clear. But it's not and it's a mess and the burden is put on the people.

Post reply on HN