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

Gen AI Makes Legal Action Cheap – and Companies Need to Prepare

hbr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 104 posts

Re: Gen AI Makes Legal Action Cheap – and Companies Need to Prepare

#31

Post by romanovcode »

pylua wrote: post #27

This is actually insane. 120,000 comments! To a certain extent if our law is already so complicated that you need to hire a lawyer to understand it that is already a fundamental problem. Simplify the rules, make it easier to understand and reason about. The computers should be able to determine if someone is breaking a law, not trying to check if it is a bad law. We should be using computing power where someone can a…

Most laws have a lot of neuances and edge-cases. That's why the words and language is so important. The more edge-cases are discovered the more complicated the text becomes.

I don't think you can easily simplify it tbh.

Re: Gen AI Makes Legal Action Cheap – and Companies Need to Prepare

#32

Post by adamc »

jfengel wrote: post #23
ryandrake wrote: post #17

If suing became an ultra-easy one-click activity, I can see two things coming: 1. maybe that would force us to shape up our tort laws a little so that not everything under the sun was actionable and 2. maybe people and companies would stop misbehaving so much because they knew there was no longer a burden to suing them. A combination of 1 and 2 sound like a great outcome.

I'd bet on 3) Courts respond by automating as well, so we get a constant background loop of suits and counter suits processing in nanoseconds.

I would bet on the opposite, new rules that prevent automation from gumming up the court system. The judiciary is going to be hostile to such approaches.

Re: Gen AI Makes Legal Action Cheap – and Companies Need to Prepare

#33

Post by theptip »

RandomLensman wrote: post #24
theptip wrote: post #15

Compute is going to be king in the new world; if you have enough GPUs you can spam legal challenges. If you have more GPUs you can deploy those to take the other side and defend. As with DoS, the interesting cases will be where an asymmetry exists in cost of request vs response (or amplification is possible). In the short term it seems likely that the government will be on the losing side of this exchange.

Depending on jurisdiction, courts might require money - so those might become more favored by people and companies to be in.

You can turn GPUs into cash flow but the reverse isn’t guaranteed to be true.

Re: Gen AI Makes Legal Action Cheap – and Companies Need to Prepare

#34

Post by throwup238 »

gus_massa wrote: post #29
ryandrake wrote: post #17

If suing became an ultra-easy one-click activity, I can see two things coming: 1. maybe that would force us to shape up our tort laws a little so that not everything under the sun was actionable and 2. maybe people and companies would stop misbehaving so much because they knew there was no longer a burden to suing them. A combination of 1 and 2 sound like a great outcome.

What about the inverse problem? If you go to McDonalds and drop a glass pf coke, can auto-Ronald sue you to get back the cost of the cleaning?

Just keep small claims like that in small claims court. Then auto-Ronald has to send $500/hr general counsel instead of farming it out to a law firm and that makes it impractical for them to sue little people.

Re: Gen AI Makes Legal Action Cheap – and Companies Need to Prepare

#35

Post by Kon-Peki »

mrangle wrote: post #9
qup wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This looks like more work/income for the legal profession, not less work. The whole article is about how with minimal effort you can cost companies and individuals beaucoup bucks in legal expenses.

Your two statements logically conflict. I understand the article. Your first line is not what it says. See the "Legal Cost Collapse" subhead. In addition, logically LLM's will increasingly allow individuals to free themselves from the need for attorneys. And again, see the Cyber Risk subhead for issues implying an intolerable state of affairs for the wider public. In that light as well as other context, your second l…

> logically LLM's will increasingly allow individuals to free themselves from the need for attorneys.

No. Not a chance. If you sue me with LLM-generated filings, I’m going to be paying a lawyer to mercilessly win, using LLMs as needed (perhaps using LLMs to test various responses to your filings that cause your LLM to spit out something that is terrible for you but you’d have no idea since you aren’t using a lawyer).

Re: Gen AI Makes Legal Action Cheap – and Companies Need to Prepare

#36

Post by RandomLensman »

theptip wrote: post #33
RandomLensman wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depending on jurisdiction, courts might require money - so those might become more favored by people and companies to be in.

You can turn GPUs into cash flow but the reverse isn’t guaranteed to be true.

Need a lot more cashflow than just to run the GPUs in some places if you file a lot of cases with the courts - and that is way before hypothetically winning anything that might help recover them.

Re: Gen AI Makes Legal Action Cheap – and Companies Need to Prepare

#37

Post by milansuk »

Higher volume legal actions can only be successful as "peer-to-peer". If it goes through a courtroom, there is no way they can handle this kind of volume(even with AI tools). Imagine that the CEO is informed there are 20 new legal actions and the first court hearing will start 10-20 years from now when the CEO will not be part of the company anymore.

Re: Gen AI Makes Legal Action Cheap – and Companies Need to Prepare

#38

Post by mrtksn »

lupire wrote: post #21
mrtksn wrote: post #18

Wouldn't this make legal counter-action cheap too? The robots fighting each other with a human referee(for now), the winner gets bounty. On a more serious note though, people not seeking justice due to complexity which leads to high costs is the real issue IMHO. Maybe the idea is that this is pushing people into finding a middle ground but it's also a known barrier to real justice. So some years ago when Turkey wasn'…

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asymmetric_warfare

It sounds like it's about to get symmetric, isn't it? More GPU's are unlikely to yield better outcomes once some threshold is reached just as more and better designed restaurant discovery apps won't make you discover better restaurants in your area if they are non-existent.

Re: Gen AI Makes Legal Action Cheap – and Companies Need to Prepare

#39

Post by munchler »

vouaobrasil wrote: post #13

> They use an AI tool to comb public information about your company and file hundreds of copyright infringement, IP, and trade secret theft cases. The scale means you can’t just ignore it or settle for a nominal amount. The "scale" itself is the problem. Because companies are so huge, and their reach is so huge, it invites techniques that increase the efficiency of attacks. Human beings weren't meant to handle things…

> If we lived in smaller, more self-sufficient communities, then we would not have scale and the people in such communities would not have much desire to develop AI either.

Yes, because they’d be too busy worrying about food and disease to bother with much else. Agrarian societies weren’t fun.

Re: Gen AI Makes Legal Action Cheap – and Companies Need to Prepare

#40

Post by jncfhnb »

romanovcode wrote: post #31
pylua wrote: post #27

This is actually insane. 120,000 comments! To a certain extent if our law is already so complicated that you need to hire a lawyer to understand it that is already a fundamental problem. Simplify the rules, make it easier to understand and reason about. The computers should be able to determine if someone is breaking a law, not trying to check if it is a bad law. We should be using computing power where someone can a…

Most laws have a lot of neuances and edge-cases. That's why the words and language is so important. The more edge-cases are discovered the more complicated the text becomes. I don't think you can easily simplify it tbh.

That’s not really true though. While legalese creates complexity a substantial part of judicial rulings is figuring out which of it should be ignored because it’s bullshit. A lot of law is driven by arguments of how things ought to be given a loose framework of law and precedent.
Post reply on HN