Australia

4478 readers

123 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

The Environment, post it to Aussie Environment
Politics, post it to Australian Politics
World News/Events, post it to World News
A question to Australians (from outside) post it to Ask an Australian

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

When posting news articles use the source headline and place your commentary in a separate comment

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

lodion@aussie.zone

bestusername@aussie.zone

eatham@aussie.zone

Nath@aussie.zone

Lawyer caught using AI-generated false citations in court case penalised in Australian first (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 1 week ago by Davriellelouna@lemmy.world to c/australia@aussie.zone

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] tuff_wizard@aussie.zone 2 points 5 days ago (3 children)

I'd say of any high paid profession, the legal trade is the most likely to be decimated by 'AI' and LLM's.

If you fed every case and ruling, law and statute into an LLM, removed it's "yes, and'ing and had someone who knew how to write a effective prompt you could answer many, many legal questions and save a lot of time searching for precedence.

Obviously someone will have to accept liability if poor advice is given but I can see some hotshot lawyer taking the risk if it means he can handle 1000's of cases at once with a few 'prompt engineers'.

[–] apostrofail@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

decimated by ‘AI’ and LLMs*
‘yes, and’ing* or “yes, and”ing*
1000s* of cases at once

[–] null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 days ago

That's not my experience, with the current state of the tech anyway.

There are models on hugging face tuned exactly as you describe.

Sure at some point in the future they will be helpful to draft legal submissions, but that's not really what lawyers "do" in the same way accountants don't spend their days doing math.

[–] Typotyper@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

If they take the risk then they should suffer the risks should it fail. Disbar them

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 days ago

Totally. However, I think so long as you manually verify, it should really be fine. It takes ages to find a case that establishes precedence, but confirming the details of the case once you've found it is relatively quick.

If you skip the manual verification, yeah you deserve what you get.