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

Answering Legal Questions with LLMs

hugodutka.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 160 posts

Re: Answering Legal Questions with LLMs

#81

Post by sandworm101 »

parpfish wrote: post #68
sandworm101 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Same with lawyers, although the stakes are lower with lawyers. Doctors and lawyer appear to be using LLMs in fundamentally different ways. Doctors appear to use them as consultants. The LLM spits out an opinion and the Doctor decides whether to go with it or not. Doctors are still writing the drug prescriptions. Lawyers seem to be submitting LLM-generated text to courts without even editing it, which is like the D…

I’m less concerned about how trained professionals use LLMs than I am about untrained folks using them to be a DIY doctor/lawyer. Luckily doctoring has the safeguard that you will need a professional to get drugs/treatments, but there isn't as much of a safety net for lawyering

>> safety net for lawyering

There are some nets, but they aren't as official. The lawyer version of a Doctor's prescription pad is the ability to send threatening letters on law firm letterhead. Lawyers are also afforded privilege's in jails and prisons, things like non-monitored phone calls, that aren't made available to non-lawyers.

Re: Answering Legal Questions with LLMs

#82

Post by still_grokking »

liampulles wrote: post #35

Key point here is that the implementation combines an LLM summary with DIRECT REFERENCES to the source material: https://hotseatai.com/ans/does-the-development-and-deploymen... That seems to me a sensible approach, because it gives lawyers the context to make it easy to review the result (from my limited understanding). I wonder if much of what would want couldn't be achieved by analyzing and storing the text embeddi…

That would work better and more efficient.

But than there's no "AI" in there. So nobody would like to throw money on it currently.

Re: Answering Legal Questions with LLMs

#83

Post by Terr_ »

liampulles wrote: post #35

Key point here is that the implementation combines an LLM summary with DIRECT REFERENCES to the source material: https://hotseatai.com/ans/does-the-development-and-deploymen... That seems to me a sensible approach, because it gives lawyers the context to make it easy to review the result (from my limited understanding). I wonder if much of what would want couldn't be achieved by analyzing and storing the text embeddi…

The un-solved problem is how to ensure users actually verify the results, since human laziness is a powerful factor.

In the long run, perhaps the most dangerous aspect of LLM tech is how much better it is at faking a layer of metadata which humans automatically interpret as trustworthiness.

"It told me that cavemen hunted dinosaurs, but it said so in a very articulate and kind way, and I don't see why the machine would have a reason to lie about that."

Re: Answering Legal Questions with LLMs

#85

Post by parpfish »

sandworm101 wrote: post #81
parpfish wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m less concerned about how trained professionals use LLMs than I am about untrained folks using them to be a DIY doctor/lawyer. Luckily doctoring has the safeguard that you will need a professional to get drugs/treatments, but there isn't as much of a safety net for lawyering

>> safety net for lawyering There are some nets, but they aren't as official. The lawyer version of a Doctor's prescription pad is the ability to send threatening letters on law firm letterhead. Lawyers are also afforded privilege's in jails and prisons, things like non-monitored phone calls, that aren't made available to non-lawyers.

but there's no safety net for things that are outside the justice system (e.g., "is this a fair contract?") or things the aren't in the justice system yet (e.g., "am i allowed to cut down my neighbor's tree if it blocks my view?")

Re: Answering Legal Questions with LLMs

#86

Post by akira2501 »

_akhe wrote: post #25

I saw a RAG demo from a startup that allows you to upload patient's medical docs, then the doctor can ask it questions like: > what's the patient's bp? even questions about drugs, histories, interactions, etc. The AI keeps in mind the patient's age and condition in its responses, when recommending things, etc. It reminded me of a time I was at the ER for a rib injury and could see my doctor Wikipedia'ing stuff - coul…

> It reminded me of a time I was at the ER for a rib injury and could see my doctor Wikipedia'ing stuff

When was this and what country was it in?

> The doctor, the lawyer - like the software engineer - will simply be more powerful than ever

I love that LLMs exist and this is what people see this as the "low hanging fruit." You'd expect that if these models had any real value, they would be used in any other walk of life first, the fact that they're targeted towards these professions, to me, highlights the fact that they are not currently useful and the owners are hoping to recoup their investments by shoving them into the highest value locations.

Anyways.. if my Doctor is using an LLM, then I don't need them anymore, and the concept of a hospital is now meaningless. The notion that there would be a middle ground here adds additional insight to the potential future applications of this technology.

Where did all the skepticism go? It's all wanna be marketing here now.

Re: Answering Legal Questions with LLMs

#87

Post by akira2501 »

georgeecollins wrote: post #43

I wonder if this "AI will replace your job" is like "AI will drive your car" in that where once something can solve 95% of the problem the general public assumes the last 5% will come very quickly. Rodney Brooks used to point out that self-driving was perceived by the public as happening very quickly, when he could show early examples in Germany from the 1950s. We all know this kind of AI has been in development a lo…

I'd say that's it's only value. This is all an obvious open threat against the labor market and is designed to depress wages.

If your business can be "staffed" by an LLM, then will not be competitive, and you will no longer exist. This is not a possible future in a capitalist market.

Re: Answering Legal Questions with LLMs

#89

Post by Terretta »

akira2501 wrote: post #86
_akhe wrote: post #25

I saw a RAG demo from a startup that allows you to upload patient's medical docs, then the doctor can ask it questions like: > what's the patient's bp? even questions about drugs, histories, interactions, etc. The AI keeps in mind the patient's age and condition in its responses, when recommending things, etc. It reminded me of a time I was at the ER for a rib injury and could see my doctor Wikipedia'ing stuff - coul…

> It reminded me of a time I was at the ER for a rib injury and could see my doctor Wikipedia'ing stuff When was this and what country was it in? > The doctor, the lawyer - like the software engineer - will simply be more powerful than ever I love that LLMs exist and this is what people see this as the "low hanging fruit." You'd expect that if these models had any real value, they would be used in any other walk of l…

> Anyways.. if my Doctor is using an LLM, then I don't need them anymore, and the concept of a hospital is now meaningless.

Let's test out this "if A then B therefore C" on a few other scenarios:

- If your lawyer is using a paralegal, you don't need your lawyer any more, and the concept of a law firm is now meaningless.

- If your home's contractor is using a day laborer, you don't need your contractor any more, and the concept of a construction company is meaningless.

- If your market is using a cashier, you don't need the manager any more, and the concept of a supermarket is meaningless.

It seems none of these make much sense.

As long as we've had vocations, we've had apprentices to masters of craft, and assistants to directors of work.

That's "all" an LLM is: a secretary pool speed typist with an autodidact's memory and the domain wisdom of an intern.

The part of this that's super valuable is the lateral thinking connections through context, as the LLM has read more than any master of any domain, and can surface ideas and connections the expert may not have been exposed to. As an expert, however, they can guide the LLM's output, iterating with it as they would their assistant, until the staff work is fit for use.

Re: Answering Legal Questions with LLMs

#90

Post by aorloff »

sandworm101 wrote: post #55

Don't be too worried about LLM arms races. Law is not as complicated as it seems on TV. Having access to a better LLM isn't going to somehow give you access to the correct incantation necessary to dismiss a case. The vast majority, like 99.99% of cases, turn on completely understood legal issues. Everyone knows everything.

Perhaps, but a lot of lawyering is very expensive. If that turns out to not be so expensive, the practice is going to change.

Right now the court system works at a snail's pace, because it expects that expensive lawyering happens slowly. If that assumption starts to change, and then the ineffectiveness of the courts due to their lack of modernization will really gum up the system because they are nowhere near prepared for a world in which lawyering is cheap and fast.

Post reply on HN