Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ and she won’t use AI of course.

Not necessarily a bad thing.

A good thing, in fact.

It really isn't. AI is transforming the Law industry. Refusal to use it just underscores how out-of-touch and out-of-practice you are.

Oh I have tested it extensively and use it. But to use it responsibly, it must be second-guessed. The accuracy is not great and the lawyer is at all times responsible for the work product. Check the ethics opinions, counselor.

Oh, without a doubt. Humans in the loop and all that. However, adamantly refusing to use it is not a good look for someone looking to get hired.

The biggest issue from an AI standpoint for lawyers and similar professionals is how do you continue to justify your fee when it's making your work exponentially more efficient. The burgeoning answer is we spend more time working on high-value activities. But let's be honest, it's going to be harder and harder to justify the hours spent in some cases, especially where it involves prep.

Firms and individual lawyers have vast work product data bases. That's their "internal AI" if you will.

And AI will soon be able to run circles around those work product databases

I posted in another thread but I put a big law firm up against chat to draft something for me- ironically related to AI. I was able to come up with a better work product from chat within an hour or so of tinkering with prompts and revisions versus biglaw’s 1-2 weeks and thousands of dollars in fees. You are kidding yourself if you think this isn’t a big deal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ and she won’t use AI of course.

Not necessarily a bad thing.

A good thing, in fact.

It really isn't. AI is transforming the Law industry. Refusal to use it just underscores how out-of-touch and out-of-practice you are.

Oh I have tested it extensively and use it. But to use it responsibly, it must be second-guessed. The accuracy is not great and the lawyer is at all times responsible for the work product. Check the ethics opinions, counselor.

Dp

Are you for real right now? You think people don’t know this? Please go back to snoozing in front of the TV

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ and she won’t use AI of course.

Not necessarily a bad thing.

A good thing, in fact.

It really isn't. AI is transforming the Law industry. Refusal to use it just underscores how out-of-touch and out-of-practice you are.

Oh I have tested it extensively and use it. But to use it responsibly, it must be second-guessed. The accuracy is not great and the lawyer is at all times responsible for the work product. Check the ethics opinions, counselor.

Oh, without a doubt. Humans in the loop and all that. However, adamantly refusing to use it is not a good look for someone looking to get hired.

The biggest issue from an AI standpoint for lawyers and similar professionals is how do you continue to justify your fee when it's making your work exponentially more efficient. The burgeoning answer is we spend more time working on high-value activities. But let's be honest, it's going to be harder and harder to justify the hours spent in some cases, especially where it involves prep.

Firms and individual lawyers have vast work product data bases. That's their "internal AI" if you will.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ and she won’t use AI of course.

Not necessarily a bad thing.

A good thing, in fact.

It really isn’t. People who don’t use it are going to fall behind. Yes, you have to work on good prompts and revise and obviously not use for case law, but it provides surprisingly helpful background info for things and can be used by her to guide her work, especially bc she doesn’t have a firm to check in with.

No. Not for a lawyer with expertise in her subject matter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You do know that boomers are the parents of Gen X?

Boomers were born in the late 1930s through the very early 1960s.

They are in their late 60s to 80s now.

People in their 40s and 50s are not "boomers"

Boomer generation started in 1946, not the late 30's.

Seriously. The "Baby Boom" literally refers to people born in the years immediately after WWII when men who were at war returned home and people who put their normal lives on hold for four years -- in the trenches and in the factories on the home front -- got busy. And by "busy" I mean fornicating like rabbits.

This conversation is very boomer. First, this friend is in her early 60s. I’m not sure if that qualifies her as a ‘boomer’ in your precise view, but its beside the point because ‘boomer’ is used shorthand as someone of an older generation who refuses to modernize their world view. Let’s move on now

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ and she won’t use AI of course.

Not necessarily a bad thing.

A good thing, in fact.

It really isn’t. People who don’t use it are going to fall behind. Yes, you have to work on good prompts and revise and obviously not use for case law, but it provides surprisingly helpful background info for things and can be used by her to guide her work, especially bc she doesn’t have a firm to check in with.

Said background may contain hallucinations. She will need to check sources that are reliable, especially since she’s been away from the law for awhile.

Very, very easy to be lead astray by AI.

Oh god, yes yes. We have all heard of this. You need to check things generated by AI. This goes without saying…. but that doesn’t mean you walk away from it completely. She hasn’t been out of law for awhile, she’s just been losing clients, probably because she’s overpriced and gives overly precious advice that is not practical.

And you can certainly use it for crafting emails, organizing notes after a call, checking a contract revision for missed issues, etc. There are many many ways to use it to make tasks more efficient. Saying ‘I don’t use it ever because one time I asked it to look up a case and the case didn’t exist’ is just stupid.

You can’t help this person if they don’t want help or are not willing to change how they do things.

They will continue their current approach and either give up or eventually realize they have to adapt.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You do know that boomers are the parents of Gen X?

Boomers were born in the late 1930s through the very early 1960s.

They are in their late 60s to 80s now.

People in their 40s and 50s are not "boomers"

Boomer generation started in 1946, not the late 30's.

Seriously. The "Baby Boom" literally refers to people born in the years immediately after WWII when men who were at war returned home and people who put their normal lives on hold for four years -- in the trenches and in the factories on the home front -- got busy. And by "busy" I mean fornicating like rabbits.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ and she won’t use AI of course.

Not necessarily a bad thing.

A good thing, in fact.

It really isn't. AI is transforming the Law industry. Refusal to use it just underscores how out-of-touch and out-of-practice you are.

Oh I have tested it extensively and use it. But to use it responsibly, it must be second-guessed. The accuracy is not great and the lawyer is at all times responsible for the work product. Check the ethics opinions, counselor.

Oh, without a doubt. Humans in the loop and all that. However, adamantly refusing to use it is not a good look for someone looking to get hired.

The biggest issue from an AI standpoint for lawyers and similar professionals is how do you continue to justify your fee when it's making your work exponentially more efficient. The burgeoning answer is we spend more time working on high-value activities. But let's be honest, it's going to be harder and harder to justify the hours spent in some cases, especially where it involves prep.

Anonymous wrote:You do know that boomers are the parents of Gen X?

Boomers were born in the late 1930s through the very early 1960s.

They are in their late 60s to 80s now.

People in their 40s and 50s are not "boomers"

Boomer generation started in 1946, not the late 30's.

Anonymous wrote:You do know that boomers are the parents of Gen X?

Boomers were born in the late 1930s through the very early 1960s.

They are in their late 60s to 80s now.

People in their 40s and 50s are not "boomers"

I am a Boomer and so is my wife. I still have a teenager at home and still working. My two older kids are barely out of college and in their first apartments. Boomers can be as young as born 1964. I am more tech savy as a boomer than anyone under the age of 60 I know as they dont really know IT. They just know how to push a button.

For fun once I brought my 1989 Laptop to work that still works. People were kinda amazed there were laptops in 1989. I also told them I had a thinkpad in 1990s and a cell home in 1990s. They all think IT was invented in last ten years. I was in a computer lab at school in 1980 doing programing and stuff.

Boomers who dont know IT are full of crap. Even my 83 years old MIL who claims she does not know IT is BS. She had a PC at her job she worked at in 1980s. She started using a computer around 1980. And I was a teller in College. Yes we had dumb terminals, ATMs.

Look Chemical Bank now Chase installed first ATMs in 1969. And I used Chase online banking (needed discs and dial up) in 1990s. The ATM for most was first time using a computer to do a transaction. But that is now 56 years ago.

The first modern automatic teller machine (ATM) in the United States was installed on September 2, 1969, at a Chemical Bank branch in Rockville Centre, New York.
The machine was manufactured by Docutel and known as a "Docuteller". It was a cash dispenser only and used plastic cards with a magnetic stripe and a Personal Identification Number (PIN), a system that became the foundation for modern ATM security.
The bank promoted the new technology with an advertising campaign announcing, "On Sept. 2, our bank will open at 9:00 and never close again!" highlighting the revolutionary 24/7 access the machine provided.

And wang word processing been around forever. The 1967 Wang PC ment you could type word docs on line and save them on PC. Yes you could not email them or send them electronically but in reality you could. You save to floppy and bring it with you.

Typing and saving to a PC is around 50 years old. I first used a computer in 1980 at school and we saved our work on a floppy. Thats 45 years ago. All Boomers should be computer savy I do zoom meetings, emails, with my 93 year old uncle. He only retired around 2010 and he was working with computers regularly since the early 1970s. And he is 93.

Wang 1200 (1972): Wang's first word processor, it was a modification of a calculator that used an IBM Selectric typewriter for input and printing, and cassette tapes for storage.
Wang 2200 (1973): A successful small business computer that included word processing capabilities, it featured a CRT screen and was programmed in a built-in BASIC.
Wang WPS (1976): This dedicated, CRT-based system was a major success, quickly establishing Wang as the market leader in word processing by offering specialized, easy-to-use functionality for offices

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ and she won’t use AI of course.

Not necessarily a bad thing.

A good thing, in fact.

It really isn't. AI is transforming the Law industry. Refusal to use it just underscores how out-of-touch and out-of-practice you are.

Oh I have tested it extensively and use it. But to use it responsibly, it must be second-guessed. The accuracy is not great and the lawyer is at all times responsible for the work product. Check the ethics opinions, counselor.

Anonymous wrote:You do know that boomers are the parents of Gen X?

Boomers were born in the late 1930s through the very early 1960s.

They are in their late 60s to 80s now.

People in their 40s and 50s are not "boomers"

genx/boomer same thing, we don't have symptahy for these people who didn't make the right easy choices to be rich off the backs of the youth

A lot of the job boards are bait and switch. Much better success researching jobs on the website of the law firm.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ and she won’t use AI of course.

Not necessarily a bad thing.

A good thing, in fact.

It really isn't. AI is transforming the Law industry. Refusal to use it just underscores how out-of-touch and out-of-practice you are.