Please stop asking AI for legal advice.

[float13@masto.hackers.town]

@riley @theleftistlawyer

Whatever happened to the lawyers who got caught presenting fake "AI" slop citations as precedent cases?

[lauerhahn@sfba.social]

@theleftistlawyer Sigh, I'm sorry you had to deal with that.
People really need to understand that GenAI is a parrot! It spits out patterns based on how humans have responded to similar words in other contexts. It does not understand what you asked, and it has no capacity for discerning whether the pattern response it gave is true or appropriate.
So it makes perfect sense that a genAI program given a legal Q as a prompt might give a response that says it's it covered by attorney -client privilege. It's just parroting.

[meltedcheese@c.im]

@NicelyManifest @theleftistlawyer We already have a major deficit of critical thinking skills. Most people prefer the easy way every time, whether that means trusting an authority figure, what the social group says, reading it in a paper, or from a social computer.

[dplattsf@sfba.social]

@theleftistlawyer @SRLevine I would just politely suggest they go collect some
real world data to back up their assertions.

[shiitaketoast@beige.party]

@theleftistlawyer @kitkat_blue My understanding is that PII is like toxic waste—you can take all the precautions and still have a leak, at which point the law doesn’t really care if you follow best practices and will still hold you liable for the consequences (however inadequate the remedy). The best practice is to minimize the amount of PII (or toxic waste) that you handle or pay through the nose for insurance.

[n_dimension@infosec.exchange]

@theleftistlawyer

Do you have time to explain how a lawyer might use strategic omission and framing that serves the lawyer's interests over the client's?

[supermoosie@mastodon.au]

@theleftistlawyer

"computers can't make mistakes."

Explain Facebook then.

[alexpsmith@beige.party]

@theleftistlawyer It’s a nightmare. They often sound like Sovereign Citizens

[riley@toot.cat]

@float13 I believe I have heard of two who got harshly sanctioned, but not yet disbarred. There was also a recent case where somebody got caught being coached on how to testify while on tand via a phone and a Bluetooth headset; they lost the case (the misbehaving witness was the plaintiff in this particular case, which was fortunate). The person to coach them happened to be a lawyer licenced in Lithuania; I'm inclined to argue that a lawyer should be disbarred for even participating in a stunt like that, but I haven't heard of the Lithuanian advocature having taken any action so far.

@theleftistlawyer

[nicelymanifest@mastodon.social]

@meltedcheese @theleftistlawyer Pretty scary when linked to uncompromisingly exploitative corporations. Our attention is harvested for profit.

Baffles me that even the bright people I know have fallen for the trap. I manage to very very rarely walk with my phone on me.

Education systems are deeply flawed, not least that we are taught that the authority figure binding us to desks when we want to be elsewhere is all knowing and we dare not have our own views.

[shigella@c.im]

@theleftistlawyer and then you read post from the person who pimps her ego with helping vulnerable people to deal with authorities.
She says that she is showing AI to her customers, so they can "get legal stuff done" or uses llm to condense emails from someone, who tries to describe her case best she could.
Of course it isn't our brave helper who will be homeless when office rejects appeal because of the hallucinations.

[shigella@c.im]

@steter @theleftistlawyer as a qa engineer I laugh hysterically

[jwcph@helvede.net]

@theleftistlawyer - not to mention insurance (at least here in DK)...

[janwwbosch@mastodon.ie]

@theleftistlawyer

I think you may need to revise the addage that a person who represents themselves has a fool for a client.