Given that someone tried to bring an avatar to speak for him, according to the article, I am thinking the entry bar to become a lawyer might be raised a little.
Judge decides case based on AI-hallucinated case law
- Thread starter Umbran
- Start date
Given that someone tried to bring an avatar to speak for him, according to the article, I am thinking the entry bar to become a lawyer might be raised a little.
Gorgon Zee
Hero
There is no need for the “if” in your statement here. Below is a sample chart -- I'm sure you can find others. Even for the same family, costs are dropping rapidly, and when you combine that with computational advances, it's a very large decrease. And inference cost is almost all power cost, so the chart below essentially shows how often LLMs become 10x more efficient than before.
So, let's do back-of-the-envelope math:
- A business needs lights 8 hours a day
- They start with incandescent bulbs using X energy an hour, so use 8X a day
- They switch to LEDs, using X/8 energy an hour, but start using them 24 hours a day, so use 3X a day
So, although this is a site dedicated to unreal worlds, I think everyone who works in any business will recognize that this is a fantasy. When management are told "a basic resource costs less" they do not think "buy more of it". They think either "yay, we make more money" or "we can buy more to do more". I am assuming the latter is what you are driving at.
And this is the core of where I think you have a disconnect from the way business AI is working. It's a very hyped area, and I can see why you might think that every company is throwing money at AI regardless of usual business planning. Maybe that was true at the very start, when costs were 100x - 1000x what they are now. It's not true now and it absolutely won't be true in 5 years when the hype cycle dies down completely.
So yes, I use more AI than I did previously (within the same budget), because I can do more with more. But I use AI more because it makes (business) sense to do so.
Here's an example from recent work I've been doing: Our company piloting using a product that transcribes and summarizes a patient's visit with a doctor. The patient has to agree to it, and the doctor has to review and edit the final result -- there are various other safety things we do, including manual checking, using other LLMs to judge the summary quality and others.
18 months ago, we could not have done this. The cost per visit would have been too high. But now, with the same (energy) budget, we can. This technology is a solid win. It means patients and doctors spend more time talking and less time with the doctor typing into a screen. The summaries, once validated and edited by the doctor, are as good as the ones that eat up doctor-patient time (and add after-hours work to the doctor).
But the important point is that this was NOT a "hey, AI is cheaper, go use more of it" activity as you characterize it. It came out of the bog-standard project planning process -- define what will be done, weigh the advantages against the costs and go for it if it's good (typically after a pilot).
The biggest thing AI companies are trying to do now is prove ROI. Because we are exiting peak hype and entering into the "I will do this only if it makes me money" part of the cycle. Do I think we will end up with more AI use? Sure, because there are enough use cases where it makes sense. But your statement implies that businesses are throwing money at AI without thinking. This is not my experience. If AIs do not prove worth their energy cost, they will not be used.
Now, the definition of "worth the energy cost" includes things like bitcoin mining, which uses a huge amount of energy and produces nothing of intrinsic value, so I am very comfortable saying stuff like that is heinous. But this is not an argument against the tool (LLMs or other models), it's an argument about the value of the result.
Which is one reason why I do AI now in a not-for-profit company rather than in the big company I used to work for.
Ryujin
Legend
That article states it was a plaintiff, in another case, who was representing himself. It wasn't a lawyer.
Gorgon Zee
Hero
A note of optimism here. Under Trump's first term, solar continued the upward trend despite his policies. In the current regime, he's actually just made the usual sorts of emotive statements, but actually done nothing except allow more pollution, which does help fossil fuels significantly, but doesn't appear to have dented the rise in solar.
I'm not an expert in this field by any means, but I am optimistic that the economic reports I read that state that clean fuel has a significant cost advantage over fossil will override any harm that our current regime can do. Maybe I'm overly hopeful, but hey, it's nice to find some hope!
That's it. The least professional use case I have for AI is to generate pictures for my campaign journal (and portraits for character sheets). If it costed 10 € per image, I wouldn't spend any electricity on it. When it cost 1 € per image, I generate a few, when it cost 1 cent per image, I'll generate a lot. But that doesn't mean it's a waste. It means that a previously unmet need (of having lots of illustrations) can now be satisfied.
A common market phenomenon (when X drops in price, people will consume more of X) doesn't mean that there is necessarily a problem with X. Worldwide plane travel is much cheaper than 30 years ago, and its use has been multiplied by over 5. It doesn't mean that people are forced to take a plane when they'd prefer to stay at home and not travel. They'd have taken a plane 30 years ago if it had been cheaper.
Last edited:
That's somewhat reassuring!
trappedslider
Legend
Woman says ChatGPT helped her pay off over $11K in debt
Jennifer Allan says AI helped her focus on paying off her debt.
The Firebird
Commoner
Saw this one earlier this week ChatGPT Is Helping Women Get PregnantWoman says ChatGPT helped her pay off over $11K in debt
Jennifer Allan says AI helped her focus on paying off her debt.www.yahoo.com
Woman says ChatGPT helped her pay off over $11K in debt
Jennifer Allan says AI helped her focus on paying off her debt.
Writing 23,000$ on a watermelon and calling that debt art should be mentionned in the thread about AI art. While she failed to sell the artwork, 2 milions views might have helped her.
Similar Threads
