A phenomenon I am seeing due to the proliferation of artificial intelligence is the opinion of various job sector’s exposure or “disrupt-ability” if you will from those not privy to the sectors discussed. A common one familiar to myself is the intersection of the practice of law and AI. I think the public is generally misguided in their understanding of the PRACTICE of law rather than the law itself. If you ask an LLM what a black letter law states and how it relates to a relatively simple set of facts you will be properly serviced majority of the time. In-fact, this information was accessible ever since the advent of Google. What this also means that you probably DONT need legal services for that situation in the first place. And I think that is wonderful for people in petty bullshit legal situations who don’t have the cash to get a lawyer or don’t even know where to start. But the PRACTICE of the law is to expand or contract existing legal statues and case law to fit the large set of facts related to a clients case. I may have a case where my sole purpose is to strategize and argue that the word “material” in a given statue does or does not encompass the facts of my clients specific situation, in addition to conducting research specific to the court system and judge involved to properly negotiate settlements or predict ruling outcomes. I may even argue that while a statute on paper seems to prohibit a certain action by my client, the reasoning for the actual statue’s existence itself says otherwise and is not functioning as the previous court intended. Or I can conjure hypotheticals to the judge that ruling this case in a certain way will expose the public to unforeseen negative consequences in the future. Not to mention taking into account jury emotions or my clients physical appearance. Additionally, I get to do this whole rigamarole from the perspective of my opposition as well. It’s a joke among lawyers that all you learn in law school is how to say “I don’t know” because the law from afar seems insanely rigid but up close you can manhandle it to your hearts desire. And that physical manipulation is where great lawyers make their big wad of cash. From family, friends, or people on Reddit, apparently somewhere along the way the general public’s interpretation of a lawyer is that of a magic-8ball, where you shook us and we regurgitated UCC articles. The fact of the matter is that law itself is (for the most part) purposefully vaguely construed in an effort to not attempt to recognize all currently possible and future situations. But holy shit am I tired of being sold AI entrenched SaaS tools that claim to reliably conduct this work, or even worse convince regular people that they’ll be able to waltz into a courtroom as a plaintiff and try a medical malpractice case with a claude subscription. submitted by /u/OutrageousMine6695
Originally posted by u/OutrageousMine6695 on r/ArtificialInteligence