I tried asking for legal advisement from a LLM the other day. My question was probably too lengthy to have a credible response. The LLM did point me at the laws but was not able to provide any advisement. I aggree with requiring a human to answer the questions asked but who can you truly trust more is the question. The facts are easily skewed in favour of one or the other depending on who has more money. I feel that this is an equitable solution for both parties and bias could be factored and that we could test before going before the courts. A way to be more fair, equitable. Similar on healthcare. Ask how much they spend their year ends and accountability. Can’t wait for the day we all have an ROI. Keep up the great videos.
What AGI truely needs to do restructure our laws so that us basic humans can understand and use them. It might be an unrealistic expectation, but I'd be surprised if their wasn't low hanging fruit to simplfy.
As someone who gets paid to work with these LLMs, my concern is their accuracy. They FREQUENTLY present incorrect information as truth, even when provided with a short documentation. There has been almost no improvement for the 28 months ive been doing this. The issue is, LLMs do not *know* anything. There is no single fact that they can repeat when asked 10,000 times with 100% accuracy.
What is the industry acceptable success rate/accuracy rate for these LLMs? If we are going to use this new tool to make decisions that impact life, it may be approving loan, medical diagnosis, each industry should come up with a standard based on specific use cases and their impact.
You're absolutely right but when math has been a lawyers forte it shows. One of England's greatest most prolific judges was an Oxford math grad. He mostly taught himself math which is incredible the more I think about it.
Great job Dean Dawson
Outstanding, Prof. Dawson!
I love this lady. She elaborate so well.
I tried asking for legal advisement from a LLM the other day. My question was probably too lengthy to have a credible response. The LLM did point me at the laws but was not able to provide any advisement. I aggree with requiring a human to answer the questions asked but who can you truly trust more is the question. The facts are easily skewed in favour of one or the other depending on who has more money. I feel that this is an equitable solution for both parties and bias could be factored and that we could test before going before the courts. A way to be more fair, equitable. Similar on healthcare. Ask how much they spend their year ends and accountability. Can’t wait for the day we all have an ROI. Keep up the great videos.
about summarizing legal documents, which techniques, large language models are impacting this sector?
What AGI truely needs to do restructure our laws so that us basic humans can understand and use them. It might be an unrealistic expectation, but I'd be surprised if their wasn't low hanging fruit to simplfy.
good job!
As someone who gets paid to work with these LLMs, my concern is their accuracy. They FREQUENTLY present incorrect information as truth, even when provided with a short documentation. There has been almost no improvement for the 28 months ive been doing this.
The issue is, LLMs do not *know* anything. There is no single fact that they can repeat when asked 10,000 times with 100% accuracy.
Look up this paper:
better call gpt
This is great!
What is the industry acceptable success rate/accuracy rate for these LLMs? If we are going to use this new tool to make decisions that impact life, it may be approving loan, medical diagnosis, each industry should come up with a standard based on specific use cases and their impact.
Do the keep your personal info safe?
Logic, numbers and elementary math in general have never been lawyers' forte. Fortunately AI now comes to rescue.
You're absolutely right but when math has been a lawyers forte it shows.
One of England's greatest most prolific judges was an Oxford math grad. He mostly taught himself math which is incredible the more I think about it.
Lawyers cannot be replaced aim is to help lawyers for better understanding of case.
Efficiency is not always a quality, privacy, security, and…! How you manage LLM in the right field ?
Is there anything for extremely large amounts of discovery. Over 6 terrabytes
THE BIG QUESTION IS:
What is legal and what is illegal for ai to do. The should be a constitutional law for AI just as we have for human beings
5:50
"The work of a lawyer must be done by a person"
press x to doubt
All lawyers need to be replaced by computers.
wrong ❌ all judges need to be replaced by Ai system
Will never happen, it’s a boys club.
@@VishalThakur-u1ftrust me under this currently economical and political system that can only lead us to digital fascism
maybe it's all replaced already
Giving back to the community, pro bono work is helping those who can't afford to pay for legal services.👍🤝✌️🌍🌎🌏⚖️
They along with DRs are done.... how do i know this? even if their job became 10x easier, they're not even considering lowering their prices
Gibberish. Did you even watch the video?
I don't think it's too far'fetched honestly. With small reasoning skills they could replace most lawyers.
No need to deal with a real person for many aspects of legal assistance.
1st comment
So then they are one up on us again. I chose not to do business with any of you. BAR CONTRACTORS