"Nearly nine out of 10 legal professionals say they use AI in some capacity ..."
-
If your lawyer was using "AI", would you want to be told explicitly?
@neil If the results are good I wouldn't have any opinions on how the work gets done.
I had that same philosophy as a manager. If people wanted to work out of a coffee shop I didn't consider that to be my problem as long as they delivered.
Mandating tools - esp. for people I hire - seems a bit strange.
-
@neil it's me, I no understand this bit!
"If it is important that your lawyer uses "AI", I'm afraid that I am not the lawyer for you."
Probably... I didn't realise you were a lawyer..?
-
@neil If the results are good I wouldn't have any opinions on how the work gets done.
I had that same philosophy as a manager. If people wanted to work out of a coffee shop I didn't consider that to be my problem as long as they delivered.
Mandating tools - esp. for people I hire - seems a bit strange.
So is your answer that you would not want to be told about it (because, to you, "AI" is just a tool)?
-
@neil it's me, I no understand this bit!
"If it is important that your lawyer uses "AI", I'm afraid that I am not the lawyer for you."
Probably... I didn't realise you were a lawyer..?> Probably... I didn't realise you were a lawyer..?
This is a very common reaction.
Most people assume that I am a model, or some kind of international playboy.
Or someone in tech.
-
If your lawyer was using "AI", would you want to be told explicitly?
@neil I'd never hire a lawyer who's using "AI", because how should I trust their expertise and the correctness if their work? No thanks...
-
So is your answer that you would not want to be told about it (because, to you, "AI" is just a tool)?
@neil I did select "something else" because I feel like there's an assumption in the question as posed that the result of the work will be affected.
-
@neil I did select "something else" because I feel like there's an assumption in the question as posed that the result of the work will be affected.
@troed But, in practice, you wouldn't feel the need to be told?
-
If your lawyer was using "AI", would you want to be told explicitly?
@neil There is only one viable business case for generative AI: fraud.
-
@troed But, in practice, you wouldn't feel the need to be told?
@neil No. And this is not even theoretical - depending on which region you get public healthcare from in Sweden they might already be using LLMs for note taking.
Doctors != Lawyers but I feel that for the discussion it would be similarly viewed.
-
If your lawyer was using "AI", would you want to be told explicitly?
@neil More than most professions, yes. They’re still on the hook and responsible for their advice. Like doctors and engineers and CPAs, giving bad advice is potentially career ending and bankrupting for them. They have some skin in the game.
-
@neil No. And this is not even theoretical - depending on which region you get public healthcare from in Sweden they might already be using LLMs for note taking.
Doctors != Lawyers but I feel that for the discussion it would be similarly viewed.
@troed Interesting - thank you!
(FWIW, I would absolutely want to know if a doctor was using AI, or even automatic transcription, as part of treating/assessing me!)
-
> Probably... I didn't realise you were a lawyer..?
This is a very common reaction.
Most people assume that I am a model, or some kind of international playboy.
Or someone in tech.
@neil @noodlemaz I thought that you were an international man of myster
-
If your lawyer was using "AI", would you want to be told explicitly?
there are certain professions where LLM based AI and fuzzy answers just won't cut it. most are actual professions, with licensing requirements, like law, medicine, accounting, civil engineering/architecture, where incorrect or fuzzy answers kill people or incarcerate them.
i don't ever see a good use of LLM AI in such professions.
-
If your lawyer was using "AI", would you want to be told explicitly?
@neil I expect anyone I interact with in a professional capacity to tell me up front what data they collect and how it's processed, including all AI use. I expect them to tell me if their notes on our meeting will be stored in the cloud, will be uploaded to another jurisdiction, will be processed by a third party... My expectations are unlikely to be met but in my opinion they ought to be normal.
-
@troed Interesting - thank you!
(FWIW, I would absolutely want to know if a doctor was using AI, or even automatic transcription, as part of treating/assessing me!)
@neil Sorry for the Swedish but here's a clickable map detailing all the different things in healthcare where AI is used at the moment. I think some of the medical terms might be readily understood in English as well due to latin roots
(And yes, there is pushback since the transcription has been dangerously wrong at times)
Vårdkartan - Utforska AI-initiativ inom vårdsektorn
Vårdkartan visar AI-initiativ i svensk hälso- och sjukvård. Utforska hur regionerna utvecklar framtidens vård med AI. Skapat av Datastory och AI Sweden.
Vårdkartan (vardkartan.ai.se)
-
@neil I expect anyone I interact with in a professional capacity to tell me up front what data they collect and how it's processed, including all AI use. I expect them to tell me if their notes on our meeting will be stored in the cloud, will be uploaded to another jurisdiction, will be processed by a third party... My expectations are unlikely to be met but in my opinion they ought to be normal.
@neil To me this is a modernization of nothing more or less than being able to see who is in the room.
-
"Nearly nine out of 10 legal professionals say they use AI in some capacity ..."
Eh?
"... according to a survey for a legal tech company"
Oh. Right.
If it is important that your lawyer uses "AI", I'm afraid that I am not the lawyer for you.
AI is mainstream in law - but clients are not told
Despite the pace of adoption, only 27% of firms have fully embedded the technology, survey shows.
Law Gazette (www.lawgazette.co.uk)
@neil id want to know exactly what they use, like someone’s DPA policy
I think there’s valid use of ML which works but anything generative is a hard no, and wouldn’t be something I’d like a lawyer to use and would be cause to look for alternative council
-
"Nearly nine out of 10 legal professionals say they use AI in some capacity ..."
Eh?
"... according to a survey for a legal tech company"
Oh. Right.
If it is important that your lawyer uses "AI", I'm afraid that I am not the lawyer for you.
AI is mainstream in law - but clients are not told
Despite the pace of adoption, only 27% of firms have fully embedded the technology, survey shows.
Law Gazette (www.lawgazette.co.uk)
@neil
Are they trying to get enough uptake rapidly enough that by the time a professional negligence case gets to court they'll have outrun the Hunter v Hanley (Sc) / Bolam (Eng) test? -
@neil Sorry for the Swedish but here's a clickable map detailing all the different things in healthcare where AI is used at the moment. I think some of the medical terms might be readily understood in English as well due to latin roots
(And yes, there is pushback since the transcription has been dangerously wrong at times)
Vårdkartan - Utforska AI-initiativ inom vårdsektorn
Vårdkartan visar AI-initiativ i svensk hälso- och sjukvård. Utforska hur regionerna utvecklar framtidens vård med AI. Skapat av Datastory och AI Sweden.
Vårdkartan (vardkartan.ai.se)
@troed Fascinating - thank you!
-
If your lawyer was using "AI", would you want to be told explicitly?
@neil I think that is quite a complicated question and depends how you define AI - using an LLM to write a contract? I'd want to know (and avoid).
Using a Co-pilot suggested reply email of "sure, that time works for me" or using a spell check that was using an LLM (I think Grammarly's spell check is AI now) ? Not so much. I wouldn't necessarily expect a lawyer who specialised in conveyancing to know all the situations where they might be using AI.
