this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2024
51 points (93.2% liked)

Asklemmy

43810 readers
1 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

When they say that "they have an army of lawyers" or that Disney has more lawyers than animators and things like that, do they tho? Is an army of lawyers really effective? Do companies actually have an "army" of lawyers to redact and sign documents?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de 61 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (19 children)

Basically it means that they can handle lots of cases at the same time while still giving each one as much attention as it needs. Winning or losing a difficult case can often be decided by how much time and expertise you can put into it. When you have a lot to lose, would you rather have a team of lawyers, each specializing in a different aspect that’s relevant to the case or a single lawyer who is overworked because he‘ll have to prepare a different case after lunch?

Edit: typo

[–] oxjox@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 years ago (17 children)

I would imagine it's only matter of time before AI can do the majority of the work for law firms. I'll have to ask my IP lawyer friend about this.

[–] vis4valentine@lemmy.ml 19 points 2 years ago (11 children)

Lawyers who has tried to use AI so far had lost their cases miserably.

[–] Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz 23 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That's because we only hear about AI being used by lawyers when they use it wrong and it hallucinates a case that doesn't exist, and then they don't actually verify the case themselves.

I'm sure lawyers are already using it successfully, we just don't hear about successful cases.

And right now they're using general purpose LLM models, I'm sure we'll get models actually focused on legal knowledge in the future that will do much better than the current ones.

[–] sonori@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago

Most of the recent change in AI has been owed to Openai’s approach of combining a more primitive transformer with going from all the books they could pirate with GPT3 to the entire text interment with GPT4. Smaller subject specific models have made relatively little progress in the last ten to fifteen years, so I don’t think a chatbot like GPT4 that regurgitates more specific information with high accuracy is likely to be on the table anytime soon.

A better search engine seems far more suited to such a task than a generitive system anyway.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)