I’ll have my AI call your AI to set up lunch.
5 Likes
These are excellent points, especially around privilege and data ownership. That said, there are counterbalances. For example, AI is already proving useful in discovery (esp. after those “document dumps” from opposing counsel), where speed and pattern recognition are huge. Also, confidential data can be protected with proper NDAs and on-prem or private-cloud deployments, some firms already do this with AI vendors under strict contractual terms.
You’re right, though, if lawyers aren’t careful with how and where they use AI, it could come back to bite them.
It’s not the Wild West though. Good news is that this discussion is happening now, not after the fact.
The main concern I have with AI right now is showcased by the original post, and is the ability to proliferate falsified images and videos for use in mass and social media platforms. I think there’s an immediate danger here.
1 Like
Interesting about AI and law topics. Really curious about how it could fit into the attorney client privilege.
I follow AI more in terms of copyright issues for images and video. It is very messy right now and the push for how it is handled legally will be a big fight with lots of money at stake.
ChatGPT is not generative AI
AGI doesn’t exist, and there’s no evidence currently to suggest it ever will exist
ChatGPT gathers information from the public domain (the internet), and then uses predictive modeling to generate texts in response to the input
LLM is not AI. ChatGPT doesn’t actually know what it’s telling you. It’s just code essentially.
It’s a sad realization that AI will eventually have the ability to generate entire movies.
Music, television, movies, paintings, writing, etc… it will eventually be all AI thus making human creativity totally meaningless
People keep saying that AI is just a tool to enhance creativity, but that’s just hopeful
optimism and unwillingness to accept the truth. Even if it’s decades away, it’s merely knowing the concept of AI that makes modern creativity insignificant
The sad thing is that the creators of all this AI know it’s bad for society, yet the curiosity of where AI could go is too powerful.
If too many people lose jobs, you’d have to create other jobs and have job training. One guy mentioned we’d have to move to universal income if too many lose jobs bc at the end of the day , the economy needs people with income to buy stuff. In the oil rich countries in the Middle East, they have universal basic income bc they simply lack enough jobs and the gov is oil rich.
So it’s a catch 22, the businesses cut jobs and replace with robots to save money then later when too many lose jobs, their taxes go up to pay people to stay home. Eventually it will catch up and be a problem. You then have tons of people with no jobs who can protest all day like the Middle East and you get bad politicians.
Well the biggest factor of the equation is energy. In order to power all of this future AI, you need lots and lots of energy.
- Solar and wind won’t cut it without major breakthroughs in battery technology. When will this happen? Nobody knows.
- We will eventually run out of economically extractable oil and natural gas. So relying on fossil fuels is not a sustainable option economically or environmentally
- That leaves us with nuclear energy, but the up front costs are too high to scale. The return on investment takes decades, and investors don’t want to wait that long to make their money back
Right now, AI is being powered by data centers using large amounts of natural gas. When natural gas is no longer an option, the costs of AI implementation and operation will increase tremendously unless nuclear can scale.
Thus, we will possibly still need people to perform jobs if the AI is too expensive even in the long yerm. Sad right? The only thing saving human jobs is merely the high cost of the replacement
1 Like
I think it depends on how widespread unemployment due to AI becomes per this article, one of many on UBI.
I think the initial curve won’t be fun before UBI but eventually 50 yrs from now it might really be needed. The pro of it is it could reduce poverty some but the con is a guy or girl with too much time on their hands. Again the Middle East is an example of where you have a lot of highly educated people with nothing to do but protest bc they also have free higher education. I’d turn my tv on on see thousands protesting during the middle of the day then I figured it out.
I think UBI would be extreme but it’s a possibility. The gov would do well to make sure people have something to do to keep them busy even if part time work.
UBI in my opinion will never occur nor will ever pass congress
It’s too complicated
In the context of AI automating away jobs, why should a engineer and a fast food worker receive the same universal basic income?
If the engineer can then find another high paying job, then that makes UBI rendered pointless and a waste of money
You don’t know what you are talking about.
ChatGPT is a generative AI. It’s built on the GPT architecture, designed to generate human-like text by predicting and creating sequences of words based on input prompts. It can produce responses, stories, or even code, making it a classic example of generative AI.
Sorry, I thought you were referring to Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)
For there to be a UBI, the taxing structure would have to change to get most all govt revenue from corporations instead of individual income tax as only a few would have income to pay taxes.