NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jfdlsjfd" data-source="post: 9698431" data-attributes="member: 42856">The whole job of the lawyer isn't to check precedent. A tool that goes fast enough for situation where a small "quality insurance check" is enough to detect the 20% failure situation and save a lot of time for the all the remaining cases is a sound business proposal. Plus, that guy was probably using a general-purpose LLM and found a lazy judge, so the whole error wasn't detected until after the trial, whereas dedicated agents using some AI technology plus automated verification on a database can get to a low enough error rate to make it a professional tool to increase lawyer's productivity (or replace assistants).On a wider point of view, I also think that between "dying with 100% certainty from lack of surgery because I can't afford a surgeon that only fails 5% of the time" and "being treated by an AI surgeon that fails 20% of the time", I'd choose to go with the AI surgeon. I am happy not to have to make this choice. [Number also pulled out of my butt of course].A tougher question would be "You're innocent. You can't afford a renowned lawyer. You can either accept a plea bargaining to get 10 years in jail or hire an AI-using lawyer that is half as expansive because he's more productive even if there is a risk he doesn't detect the AI is making him doing a bad decision. You'll either be proven innocent or get a 20 years sentence. You don't know the exact percent of cases the AI-using lawyer is losing due to using AI. You also don't know the exact number of case the renowned lawyer is losing due to giving your case to be handled by a junior recruit, but you suspect it might be lower, and you can't afford the renowned lawyer anyway. What do you do?"</blockquote>

Verification