Generative AI Is Coming For the Lawyers

[Thom Paine]

I can see AI replacing or augmenting the role of legal assistants, legal clerks and paralegals in law firms - researching case law, editing legal forms and court documents, drafting correspondence and documents etc. Obviously, just as with human assistants, any such work product has to be reviewed by a lawyer. It could conceivably reduce a firm's administrative costs and that would be particularly advantageous for one or two lawyer firms in more rural areas where the market for legal services is smaller, but with reduced admin costs, it might make such practices more attractive to lawyers.

There might be conceivable advantages that could benefit legal practitioners as you state. That possibly could be a singular area. It will be widespread use.

It looks, to me, to be a slow transition to all AI legal system; ie. juries.

Despite the fact that law is considered concrete, black and white, without emotion, there is a humanity to law, as evidenced by invocation of "the spirit of the law", that no AI can achieve.

It almost makes two movies, 'Minority Report' and 'Demolition Man' appear prescient.

[Dr. Who]

There might be conceivable advantages that could benefit legal practitioners as you state. That possibly could be a singular area. It will be widespread use.

It looks, to me, to be a slow transition to all AI legal system; ie. juries.

Despite the fact that law is considered concrete, black and white, without emotion, there is a humanity to law, as evidenced by invocation of "the spirit of the law", that no AI can achieve.

It almost makes two movies, 'Minority Report' and 'Demolition Man' appear prescient.

I think, at least currently, the term artificial intelligence is a bit of a misnomer. The computer isn't thinking, it is processing routines. As such it is a tool and if it's regarded as a tool, then it can only replace simpler tasks. It cannot replace judgment, intuition or as you say, the humanity in law. However, say you want to drill down on case law, it can certainly do that much more quickly than you can do so yourself. It can replace a lot of tasks that are really just drudgery. There is software out there already that does these tasks but AI would simply make it easier and it could interface with the user verbally, so you don't have to type instructions.

[Thom Paine]

I think, at least currently, the term artificial intelligence is a bit of a misnomer. The computer isn't thinking, it is processing routines. As such it is a tool and if it's regarded as a tool, then it can only replace simpler tasks. It cannot replace judgment, intuition or as you say, the humanity in law. However, say you want to drill down on case law, it can certainly do that much more quickly than you can do so yourself. It can replace a lot of tasks that are really just drudgery. There is software out there already that does these tasks but AI would simply make it easier and it could interface with the user verbally, so you don't have to type instructions.

No disagreement with you. My concern is future progression of acceptance..

[Standing Wolf]

I can see AI replacing or augmenting the role of legal assistants, legal clerks and paralegals in law firms - researching case law, editing legal forms and court documents, drafting correspondence and documents etc. Obviously, just as with human assistants, any such work product has to be reviewed by a lawyer. It could conceivably reduce a firm's administrative costs and that would be particularly advantageous for one or two lawyer firms in more rural areas where the market for legal services is smaller, but with reduced admin costs, it might make such practices more attractive to lawyers.

That's what I was going to suggest. AI is not so much coming for the lawyers, but for the legal assistants and paralegals.

[Just AnotherPerson]

AI is coming for us all at every level even inside of our own bodies.