While the thought of lawyers lawyering with AI gives me the icks, I also understand that at a certain point it may play out like the self-driving car argument: once the AI is good enough, it will be better than the average human – since I think it’s obvious to everyone that human lawyers make plenty of mistakes. So if you knew the average lawyer made 3.6 mistakes per case and the AI only made 1.2, it’s still a net gain. On the other hand tho, this could lead to complacency that drives even more injustice.
Yeah, one real concern is that bottom-of-the-barrel lawyers will continue to just use their $20/month chatGPT subscription, and not something more lawyer-centric that will (eventually) be able to weed out the true stupidity almost 100% of the time.
Subscription? You think these people are paying to use the slop machine? I’d expect these people are using it partly because they can just use the free tier.