Comment on Lawyer caught using AI-generated false citations in court case penalised in Australian first
tuff_wizard@aussie.zone 4 days agoI’d say of any high paid profession, the legal trade is the most likely to be decimated by ‘AI’ and LLM’s.
If you fed every case and ruling, law and statute into an LLM, removed it’s "yes, and’ing and had someone who knew how to write a effective prompt you could answer many, many legal questions and save a lot of time searching for precedence.
Obviously someone will have to accept liability if poor advice is given but I can see some hotshot lawyer taking the risk if it means he can handle 1000’s of cases at once with a few ‘prompt engineers’.
That’s not my experience, with the current state of the tech anyway.
There are models on hugging face tuned exactly as you describe.
Sure at some point in the future they will be helpful to draft legal submissions, but that’s not really what lawyers “do” in the same way accountants don’t spend their days doing math.
If they take the risk then they should suffer the risks should it fail. Disbar them
Totally. However, I think so long as you manually verify, it should really be fine. It takes ages to find a case that establishes precedence, but confirming the details of the case once you’ve found it is relatively quick.
If you skip the manual verification, yeah you deserve what you get.
apostrofail@lemmy.world 1 day ago