Title shortened, original was “You Won’t Believe the Excuses Lawyers Have After Getting Busted for Using AI”

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    2 days ago

    First incident: A really stiff fine in the five digits or bigger, plus mandatory schooling on the failures of AI.

    Second incident: Goodbye bar.

  • Spacehooks@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 days ago

    lawyers are trying to outsource their own job and not even fact checking.

    that’like your whole thing man

    • Kushan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yeah it’s fucking stupid because this is actually one of those annoying niche areas where LLM’s might actually be useful. A lot of lawyering is studying prior case law; if you can find a prior case that’s similar to yours and had the desired outcome, that’s a very strong argument for you case.

      An LLM could easily parse millions of prior cases much faster than a human could, all they needed to do was actually fact check the results - the easiest part of it. But no they just took it as gospel because they’re shitty lawyers.

  • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    2 days ago

    Did they pause to type into their phones to ask ChatGPT how to response to these accusations?

  • ruuster13@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 days ago

    I just don’t understand how a lawyer named “Innocent” could be so brazen in his AI usage…