Asklemmy

44129 readers

397 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Does the quantity of lawyers actually makes a difference? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

30 comments fedilink hide all child comments

When they say that "they have an army of lawyers" or that Disney has more lawyers than animators and things like that, do they tho? Is an army of lawyers really effective? Do companies actually have an "army" of lawyers to redact and sign documents?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] FlashMobOfOne 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

All AI does is determine the probability of the next word that's about to be said.

There definitely will come a time when an AI can craft legal thought, but it is a long, long time off.

Source: I'm a legal tech who's actually helping my firm test legal gen AI platforms, all of which produce information that can't be relied upon without human validation.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I currently use Copilot to help me solve problems with Microsoft Power Platform. "AI", the generic misleading word we use to describe advanced search, can scour the web and solve a problem for me in seconds. It's only a matter of time before a more advanced algorithm "learns" all the case law to ever exist. At some point, I imagine, you can type in all the details about your case and the machine with find all the applicable court cases in a matter of minutes. It's still up to the lawyers to apply and utilize this but the research, the stuff that takes an army of lawyers, will be done in a fraction of a fraction of the time.

I said it's a matter of time, not that it's happening now or will happen tomorrow. But I do believe it will happen in our lifetime, very likely within the next ten years.

[–] FlashMobOfOne 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Yep. I use ChatGPT myself to help with research on coding and other issues.

I don't expect AI is going to replace humans anytime soon, but the use of it is going to be an essential skill, and people and companies who don't learn how will definitely go extinct.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

It is most certainly already replacing some humans. One example is some video content now being generated by AI rather than a digital artist; same for stock photos.

All mechanization and automation is designed to aid or replace humans. In some cases it's about safety or about effort. But ultimately, it's about a company increasing their profitability. Profits will motivate adoption.