The Jr attorneys will use AI to compete with the senior attorneys at a 90 percent discount.

Anonymous wrote:AI companies would like you to believe so. Anyone actually working in or using AI extensively will tell you law jobs, even junior ones, are very safe in the long term. In the short term, jobs will be lost as many companies will overestimate its abilities.

This. AI cannot actually do any lawyer job. But my employer can fire me, fumble around with AI for a bit, crash and burn ... and meanwhile I still got fired. We're in danger from the perception, not the actual product.

Notice that no one wants to talk about the cool stuff AI actually can do, like review a huge number of mammograms or biopsy cross sections to look for patterns that might better predict cancer in the future. That wouldn't take anybody's job, and it could make actual lives better. But all the AI-heads are interested in is replacing existing jobs that annoy them, not creating things that help people. It's pretty easy to extrapolate from that that how bad an AI lawyer would be.

AI companies would like you to believe so. Anyone actually working in or using AI extensively will tell you law jobs, even junior ones, are very safe in the long term. In the short term, jobs will be lost as many companies will overestimate its abilities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s coming for junior associates jobs. Can spit out a first draft that experienced lawyers will have to review.

No, it will spit out the first draft that junior lawyers will research and review for accuracy and make sure nothing was missed and that it is in fact the best argument. Then senior attorneys will review.

Correct…but they will expect junior attorneys to be 3x more productive.

So they either bring in more business or cut 2/3 of the junior attorneys.

Anonymous wrote:When do we see AI overtaking most legal jobs? Is it the safest to stay in fed government or will they also phase us out? Or are we grandfathered in, and this is the next generation's issue?

AI and ethical obligations don't mix well and won't for a long while yet.

Anonymous wrote:It’s coming for junior associates jobs. Can spit out a first draft that experienced lawyers will have to review.

No, it will spit out the first draft that junior lawyers will research and review for accuracy and make sure nothing was missed and that it is in fact the best argument. Then senior attorneys will review.

Anonymous wrote:There have been over 500 billion in capital investments in AI, and the revenue, not profit, is at most 30 billion. That's less than the market for wearables.

Where are the news articles that jobs are being replaced? The articles about the improvement from cutting workers and moving to ai? No one is actually doing it. It's all been hype and speculation.

Ask yourself, why are you so invested in people losing jobs and getting replaced by ai? Who wins in that situation? Almost certainly not you. Most people lose.

I swear, the lack of critical thinking by ai-vangelists is so concerning. They would actually be the worst users of ai, because they likely lack the judgment to critically engage with the tool and cut through hallucinations

Open AI will finish 2025 at around $13BN which is a 243% increase. They project their annual revenue run rate if you took just December 2025 and multiplied by 12 will put them at $20BN, though they predict their actual total revenue will be close to $30BN. That's one company. The overall pure-play AI world is on track for $100BN of revenue in 2026.

You are documenting the history of technology investment. Facebook didn't turn a profit for nearly 10 years and now mints hundreds of billions...same for Amazon (though not as profitable)...etc. There will be many Pets.coms, Friendsters, Excite@Home, etc. that won't make it.

Deepseek and other AI models that piggyback on massive investments already made are the next iteration. They don't need to spend tens of billions.

Anonymous wrote:There have been over 500 billion in capital investments in AI, and the revenue, not profit, is at most 30 billion. That's less than the market for wearables.

Where are the news articles that jobs are being replaced? The articles about the improvement from cutting workers and moving to ai? No one is actually doing it. It's all been hype and speculation.

Ask yourself, why are you so invested in people losing jobs and getting replaced by ai? Who wins in that situation? Almost certainly not you. Most people lose.

I swear, the lack of critical thinking by ai-vangelists is so concerning. They would actually be the worst users of ai, because they likely lack the judgment to critically engage with the tool and cut through hallucinations

Some of these posters must have stock in the AI companies. They are positively gleeful. Sick.

There have been over 500 billion in capital investments in AI, and the revenue, not profit, is at most 30 billion. That's less than the market for wearables.

Where are the news articles that jobs are being replaced? The articles about the improvement from cutting workers and moving to ai? No one is actually doing it. It's all been hype and speculation.

Ask yourself, why are you so invested in people losing jobs and getting replaced by ai? Who wins in that situation? Almost certainly not you. Most people lose.

I swear, the lack of critical thinking by ai-vangelists is so concerning. They would actually be the worst users of ai, because they likely lack the judgment to critically engage with the tool and cut through hallucinations

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's with the daily AI hate posts?

LOL I am not a lawyer so I do not read this as a hate post. I do, in fact, hate AI and think we are like a bunch of drunk toddlers behind the wheel. But the thought of lawyers not getting paid $300+/hr is pretty amazing to me. Imagine how many poor people won't be screwed because they can't afford a lawyer anymore.

Imagine how many people will be screwed by bad legal advice from AI.
If you're worried about access to lawyers there are better solutions than AI, like states adopting standard forms for residential leases, wills, etc., and expanding legal aid services.

That's why you could use several different A.I.s and compare their advice. Much better than taking the advice of just one human lawyer.

Lol well, good luck with the human judge then.

Might have A.I. judges soon also. Most human judges are not very good, and being a judge is supposed to just be a referree position, so even easier for A.I. to take over procedural rules in a courtroom.

Tell me you have no clue without telling me …

Tell us you are scared of being made obsolete by technology, that is obvious.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I asked AI who the vice president was today and it informed me that it is Kamala Harris.

A lot of them use older data. Your us case is not how most business use AI. We upload everything and use AI to pull from all the data and give, data, advice, analysis, standard etc. For instance you can have it review contracts, sops, other aggrements to make sure you are not violating any of those with a new agreement. You can have it generate a document just by setting instructions and prompting it with a couple pieces of data in no particular format, great for proposals, quotes etc. Million and one uses case just with your own data and documents.

Recipe for disaster

Have you done this? Regardless of your beliefs it works.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When do we see AI overtaking most legal jobs? Is it the safest to stay in fed government or will they also phase us out? Or are we grandfathered in, and this is the next generation's issue?

Explain how “AI” will take over legal jobs.

DP but explain how it could not? It's one of the best fields to implement AI.

Because lawyers are getting paid not only to produce copious amount of written output but also yo take responsibility for that output. AI can’t do that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's with the daily AI hate posts?

LOL I am not a lawyer so I do not read this as a hate post. I do, in fact, hate AI and think we are like a bunch of drunk toddlers behind the wheel. But the thought of lawyers not getting paid $300+/hr is pretty amazing to me. Imagine how many poor people won't be screwed because they can't afford a lawyer anymore.

Imagine how many people will be screwed by bad legal advice from AI.
If you're worried about access to lawyers there are better solutions than AI, like states adopting standard forms for residential leases, wills, etc., and expanding legal aid services.

That's why you could use several different A.I.s and compare their advice. Much better than taking the advice of just one human lawyer.

Lol well, good luck with the human judge then.

Might have A.I. judges soon also. Most human judges are not very good, and being a judge is supposed to just be a referree position, so even easier for A.I. to take over procedural rules in a courtroom.

Tell me you have no clue without telling me …

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's with the daily AI hate posts?

LOL I am not a lawyer so I do not read this as a hate post. I do, in fact, hate AI and think we are like a bunch of drunk toddlers behind the wheel. But the thought of lawyers not getting paid $300+/hr is pretty amazing to me. Imagine how many poor people won't be screwed because they can't afford a lawyer anymore.

Imagine how many people will be screwed by bad legal advice from AI.
If you're worried about access to lawyers there are better solutions than AI, like states adopting standard forms for residential leases, wills, etc., and expanding legal aid services.

That's why you could use several different A.I.s and compare their advice. Much better than taking the advice of just one human lawyer.

Lol well, good luck with the human judge then.

Might have A.I. judges soon also. Most human judges are not very good, and being a judge is supposed to just be a referree position, so even easier for A.I. to take over procedural rules in a courtroom.

Bad lawyers are at risk