BoldestKobold t1_j5phlir wrote on January 24, 2023 at 5:42 PM

Notice how this "article" quotes no actual attorneys?

This guy has been getting dragged on Twitter by attorneys and paralegals for weeks, and rightly so. Some of the stuff he has bragged about is already malpractice. Like they claim the AI already generated a subpoena for the prosecution's witness. WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT? Even teenage kids know that you don't want the cop to show up to your traffic court date.

So now that we already know they are using AI to generate malpractice, who is held accountable?

I'm a lawyer. Tons of shit about the practice of law sucks and should be streamlined for better/cheaper/more efficient outcomes. But this ain't it.

ParanoidFactoid t1_j5qsj6w wrote on January 24, 2023 at 10:29 PM

Let's be honest with ourselves about what the tool really is: It's a chatbot. It doesn't know what the words mean. It doesn't understand context. It isn't aware of itself, much less the circumstances it writes about. It groups words according to grammar and statistical correlations.

This is NOT AI. It is not intelligent. We don't even know where to begin to create that. With AI, it's like the 1980s all over again.

imdrunkontea t1_j5xiofd wrote on January 26, 2023 at 6:11 AM

Same with Al art. It has no idea what it's doing, only that certain keywords correlate to certain patterns of pixel colors in the billions of images it ~~harvested~~ "learned" from. As one lawyer put it, these "AI" algorithms are just sophisticated collage tools.

rendrr t1_j5tkb3z wrote on January 25, 2023 at 1:55 PM

Expert system could be a great help for lawyers. Not in this implementation or role, but like an intelligent search engine for laws and cases. Systems like IBM Watson which would go to lawyer school and sip through years of cases. Not saying it would be fantastic, but at least it's a knowledge based system. ChatGPT... well, it's known to make stuff up, like citing fake sources in generated research paper. Would be fun for a lawyer if it cited a fake court case.

ItchyDoggg t1_j5zboen wrote on January 26, 2023 at 4:47 PM

Obviously the lawyer who asked the AI to generate the subpoena would be responsible for the malpractice, there is no mechanism at all to shift that liability to the AI provider. The lawyer who let's AI fuck up on behalf of a client could be sued by the client or punished by their state bar / disciplinary committee even if the Client signed a waiver about this in the retainer.