this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2026
105 points (96.5% liked)

Technology

87956 readers
2473 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

I'm observing "This guy used AI" and you reply with a multiple-paragraph comment arguing about the legal ramifications of a lawyer using generative AI. I'm just saying he used AI. I'm implying that's embarrassing, but I'm not calling for their disbarment; so I don´t know what motivated your detailed legal analysis.

Imagine if I observed, "Is that priest wearing only a Speedo-brand grape smuggler during his Sunday sermon?" and you started explaining it's actually legal for the priest to do that and here's the case law and here are the situations in which the priest would be putting himself in legal jeopardy by wearing a speedo. I mean, you're not wrong, but, like, what?

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 0 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

You noticed that his text followed a common AI pattern. I replied, basically, with "So what? He's responsible for it regardless".

The legal stuff is relevant because he is a lawyer and is discussing it in the courtroom.

[–] schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

You don't find it at all embarassing or noteworthy that a law firm likely charging hundreds if not thousands of dollars per billable hour is outputting chatbot dialogue?

I do. And I want to live in a world where that is professionally unacceptable.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

I think those firms justify their bill rates by results, not by a literary analysis of their filings.

[–] schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 hour ago

Yes, and then they bill by the hour.