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

A.I. note takers are making lawyers nervous

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 204 posts

Re: A.I. note takers are making lawyers nervous

#181

Post by Semaphor »

SlinkyOnStairs wrote: post #153
Semaphor wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I often (ish) translate between English and German, two languages I speak very well. The quality of translation is amazing and far better than what old systems did. Maybe it depends on topics or length, for me it's usually 1-2 paragraphs of a German article to share online.

> Maybe it depends on topics or length, for me it's usually 1-2 paragraphs of a German article to share online. Same languages, same use case. My experience is different. On both google translate and others. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Haven’t used google translate in a long time, mostly because of quality issues before LLMs. Deepl was leading for a while, nowadays I’m very happy with Kagi translate.

Re: A.I. note takers are making lawyers nervous

#182

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #101

Alternative to archive.is No Javascript, no CAPTCHA, no geoblocking, no DDoS directed at blog https://static.nytimes.com/narrated-articles/synthetic/artic...

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/06/09/us/podfasters-audio-accel...

Apparently not everyone listens to audio at the same speed

Re: A.I. note takers are making lawyers nervous

#183

Post by rationalist »

bottlepalm wrote: post #178
AstroBen wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just work meetings. This is being taken to healthcare settings, also.

That's fine with me actually. I recently had an appointment where the doctor asked if he could use AI notes, I said yes, and meeting was so much nicer than before when the doctor is typing half the time. We can have a real conversation, nothing I say is missed, and later on the doctor can use AI to cross reference results or whatever else with our past discussions. That's win-win all around.

The cases I've heard of where AI doctor notes went badly, is in recording numbers that another doctor relies upon. If it's just a casual conversation, it's probably okay. If it's about cancer treatments, maybe ask for manual notes.

I've had doctors write horribly-incorrect notes in my digital chart after appointments, so please don't think I'm trying to be a Luddite.

Re: A.I. note takers are making lawyers nervous

#184

Post by gib444 »

prima-facie wrote: post #166

Somewhat off-topic: I've spent thousands of pounds on legal advice which has ranged from poor to mediocre. I found that most solicitors would refrain from giving proper advice and are there only to be instructed. You have to do your own homework, read the law, the case-law, prepare notes and documents, etc. With the rise of LLMs I found it easier to do all these things and come prepared to these meetings, or even do…

IANAL

How can AI learn the secret procedural tricks? Where's the training data?

And is there a legal consequence for AI giving bad/incorrect legal advice? Can they get disbarred?

Can you be sure the AI tool even read an entire piece of legislation (inb4 "you can't with lawyers either" : I thought we're aiming for better)?

How will they understand the inner workings of courts, CPS etc? How will they network with other lawyers for advice and learning (how will the LLM train on that)?

Re: A.I. note takers are making lawyers nervous

#185

Post by projectazorian »

burningion wrote: post #6

The main point raised in the article is that these bots may void attorney client privileges. But the real danger with these IMO is that they're turning casual conversations into a permanent record, and one that will be completely discoverable in court, should the company get into trouble later.

Exactly. “Don’t write anything down you wouldn’t want to see in the newspaper” just became “Don’t say anything in your meetings or 1:1s that you wouldn’t want to see in the newspaper.”

I’m overall an AI optimist but this is going to blow up in people’s faces very quickly. (I would explain this to my manager but he has AI note taking turned on in all his meetings!)

And that’s not even getting into the use of it for sensitive clinical notes in eg. mental health…

Re: A.I. note takers are making lawyers nervous

#186

Post by PeterStuer »

burningion wrote: post #6

The main point raised in the article is that these bots may void attorney client privileges. But the real danger with these IMO is that they're turning casual conversations into a permanent record, and one that will be completely discoverable in court, should the company get into trouble later.

If you are on a call, it's already potentally recorded and transcribed. This just makes it so you also have that capability.

Re: A.I. note takers are making lawyers nervous

#187

Post by PeterStuer »

operation_moose wrote: post #12
coffeebeqn wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plus they are super inaccurate. Gemini gets one of its three bullet subtly or very majorly wrong almost every time. Just a few weeks ago Gemini said we’re rolling out our payment setup in Russia. You know the place where we have 20+ sanctions packages on? We were talking about France in the meeting.

We've found they're surprisingly good if everyone on the call is using a decent headset. The problems start when using conference room audio or someone is on their laptop mic. If they miss a word they never do unintelligible , they just start playing madlibs based on the rest of the sentence. We just went through a round of 100+ (non-sensitive) VoC interviews and they really cut down the workload of compiling all of…

I have done many transcriptions of messy meeting recordings with thic euro-english accents, and a local Whisper large handled them near perfect.

Re: A.I. note takers are making lawyers nervous

#188

Post by pfortuny »

daft_pink wrote: post #24
pfortuny wrote: post #10

Honest question: Do these systems not share data with the AI servers? Or are they all local (on-site, not on-computer)? I am totally baffled by the trust people put on these systems, sharing with them the most obviously private data.

If you are in a trusted industry like finance or healthcare, the popular ones generally have industry wide privacy certification like HIPAA compliant, SOC 2 Type 2 etc.

Ok, thank you.

Re: A.I. note takers are making lawyers nervous

#189

Post by pfortuny »

dsr_ wrote: post #20
pfortuny wrote: post #10

Honest question: Do these systems not share data with the AI servers? Or are they all local (on-site, not on-computer)? I am totally baffled by the trust people put on these systems, sharing with them the most obviously private data.

Most services have privacy policies that boil down to: - we promise not to share PII (defined as narrowly as possible) - we promise not to share payment information except with our payment system - if you pay us, we promise not to train LLMs on your data - you agree that everything else can be used for any business purpose, including marketing, intelligence gathering, and "sharing with our 1735 trusted partners".

OK. But those can be "Zukerberg" promises?

Re: A.I. note takers are making lawyers nervous

#190

Post by netdevphoenix »

Semaphor wrote: post #95
SlinkyOnStairs wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's just a token predictor what do you expect? The point isn't that it's unexpected. It's that prior text-to-speech systems were much better about this particular failure mode, prone to spitting out entirely incorrect words but not rephrasing entire sentences. This is a particularly bad failure mode because people don't notice it. > What we need are tools that embrace that and ping the agent to validate what it ju…

I often (ish) translate between English and German, two languages I speak very well. The quality of translation is amazing and far better than what old systems did. Maybe it depends on topics or length, for me it's usually 1-2 paragraphs of a German article to share online.

> The quality of translation is amazing and far better than what old systems did.

Are you native in both languages? If you are only native in one of them, it would be insightful to find if people with your skillset but native in the language you are not have the same opinion as you.

Post reply on HN