Top Law Schools

Have any of you read this story yet? Robots able to do some "minor" lawyering and win. Where do you see this going? Will the lawyer end up in the same line as the McD worker? Will humans be overtaken by kiosks??

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/free ... 52274.html

If robots are able to engage in actual legal reasoning/argument, we are already living in either a utopian or dystopian society and employment will be the least of our worries in either case.

Nagster5 wrote:If robots are able to engage in actual legal reasoning/argument, we are already living in either a utopian or dystopian society and employment will be the least of our worries in either case.

IDK, AI is rapidly evolving. This may no longer be a joke soon. Which is kinda crazy. Time to watch iRobot and invent a martial art to take down our robot overlords....

Skynet. It's here.

But really, this just looks like a Legalzoom type of thing. The dude's ambition in thinking one day Siri can represent you in court is just reflective of his idealistic undergraduate views. Bless his heart.

DoNotPay is a chatbot and, using artificial intelligence, asks its pro-bono clients a series of questions and plugs those answers into a form letter template. Then, a pdf is available to save, email, or print. . . . Some of the matters relate to legal claims, but much of the help is simply with writing strongly-worded lawyerly letters for things like formulating requests for compensation from airlines, requests to landlords, reporting discrimination, filing for maternity leave, dealing with defective products, or disputing a credit report entry or credit card charge.

Sounds like it mostly drafts and saves form letters using a decision tree based on user inputs. Not too worried about my job yet.

Also, Ethan Wolff-Mann is a wonderful name.

MarkinKansasCity wrote:http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 0&t=233141

Lmao. (OP Here)

The robot does not "represent you in court." It is simply a piece of software that automates tons of repetitive/mindless stuff that attorneys routinely bill hundreds of dollars an hour for, like filling out forms. Legal tech is still in the stone age and is ripe for innovation. In some areas, the ship has already sailed/is sailing -- e.g. predictive coding in doc review. And in other areas it is just starting to take off, like M&A due diligence software. I've seen quite a few commercial examples of bots that will read hundreds of contract and fill in a due diligence chart in a few minutes. All you need is like one junior to review and verify, but it literally cuts down the diligence bill by like 80%.

Think about what lawyers do and how much of it requires human intelligence/emotions. Much of it is chimp work and not everyone is David Boies.

Raiden wrote:Skynet. It's here.

But really, this just looks like a Legalzoom type of thing. The dude's ambition in thinking one day Siri can represent you in court is just reflective of his idealistic undergraduate views. Bless his heart.

ya, thats what i was thinking. probably a tad more efficient,effective, and easy.


^Also, that is industry specific software (the doc review stuff, etc.). This is more of an everyday end-user software. totally different in application but same concept to some degree... One could potentially threaten your job (theoretically), the other helps you do your job more efficiently and organized.

Soup2Nuts wrote:

Raiden wrote:Skynet. It's here.

But really, this just looks like a Legalzoom type of thing. The dude's ambition in thinking one day Siri can represent you in court is just reflective of his idealistic undergraduate views. Bless his heart.

ya, thats what i was thinking. probably a tad more efficient,effective, and easy.


^Also, that is industry specific software (the doc review stuff, etc.). This is more of an everyday end-user software. totally different in application but same concept to some degree... One could potentially threaten your job (theoretically), the other helps you do your job more efficiently and organized.

I'm not that concerned overall, but if I was it would be over making tasks like diligence and doc review way more efficient rather than making it easy for someone to fill out a form to incorporate an LLC or whatever. One could seriously reduce the need for hours on tasks done in big matters. On the other hand, if the task is so simple a robot can literally fill out a premade form for you, how much would anyone actually bill on that anyway.

At the same time, even with increasingly outsourced doc review, everybody still seems to be doing alright.

sublime wrote:

Soup2Nuts wrote:

Raiden wrote:Skynet. It's here.

But really, this just looks like a Legalzoom type of thing. The dude's ambition in thinking one day Siri can represent you in court is just reflective of his idealistic undergraduate views. Bless his heart.

ya, thats what i was thinking. probably a tad more efficient,effective, and easy.


^Also, that is industry specific software (the doc review stuff, etc.). This is more of an everyday end-user software. totally different in application but same concept to some degree... One could potentially threaten your job (theoretically), the other helps you do your job more efficiently and organized.

I'm not that concerned overall, but if I was it would be over making tasks like diligence and doc review way more efficient rather than making it easy for someone to fill out a form to incorporate an LLC or whatever. One could seriously reduce the need for hours on tasks done in big matters. On the other hand, if the task is so simple a robot can literally fill out a premade form for you, how much would anyone actually bill on that anyway.

At the same time, even with increasingly outsourced doc review, everybody still seems to be doing alright.

I guess, if "everyone" doesn't include the bottom half of every school below the T20.

Speaking from experience, a really shitty market (more labor than demand) won't make the best unemployed, but it will cut their rates in the resulting bloodbath. If robots/AI cut 90% of doc review, form filling, and due diligence out of the realm of lawyering, then the work that is left is going to be fought over by all those unemployed lawyers. There will probably always be a relative handful at the top raking it in, but mass unemployment fucks over most of the people that still have jobs too.

MarkinKansasCity wrote:

sublime wrote:

Soup2Nuts wrote:

Raiden wrote:Skynet. It's here.

But really, this just looks like a Legalzoom type of thing. The dude's ambition in thinking one day Siri can represent you in court is just reflective of his idealistic undergraduate views. Bless his heart.

ya, thats what i was thinking. probably a tad more efficient,effective, and easy.


^Also, that is industry specific software (the doc review stuff, etc.). This is more of an everyday end-user software. totally different in application but same concept to some degree... One could potentially threaten your job (theoretically), the other helps you do your job more efficiently and organized.

I'm not that concerned overall, but if I was it would be over making tasks like diligence and doc review way more efficient rather than making it easy for someone to fill out a form to incorporate an LLC or whatever. One could seriously reduce the need for hours on tasks done in big matters. On the other hand, if the task is so simple a robot can literally fill out a premade form for you, how much would anyone actually bill on that anyway.

At the same time, even with increasingly outsourced doc review, everybody still seems to be doing alright.

I guess, if "everyone" doesn't include the bottom half of every school below the T20.

Speaking from experience, a really shitty market (more labor than demand) won't make the best unemployed, but it will cut their rates in the resulting bloodbath. If robots/AI cut 90% of doc review, form filling, and due diligence out of the realm of lawyering, then the work that is left is going to be fought over by all those unemployed lawyers. There will probably always be a relative handful at the top raking it in, but mass unemployment fucks over most of the people that still have jobs too.

True, automation in general creates immediate unemployment, but I'd argue it fosters long term economic growth as long as the labor market advances with the economy's needs. This is why manufacturing jobs will never be like what they were before in the US, and why service jobs shows more growth.

What that means for the specific legal market, I am not sure. Sure, doc review is less of a need, great. Lawyers are already trained on a pretty technical skill, but law firms hire entry level associates for a lot of grunt work. So there are less law firm entry level jobs, but maybe more opening that require more sophisticated legal expertise that before was too expensive to house.

But I am just talking and have no idea.

Raiden wrote:True, automation in general creates immediate unemployment, but I'd argue it fosters long term economic growth as long as the labor market advances with the economy's needs. This is why manufacturing jobs will never be like what they were before in the US, and why service jobs shows more growth.

What that means for the specific legal market, I am not sure. Sure, doc review is less of a need, great. Lawyers are already trained on a pretty technical skill, but law firms hire entry level associates for a lot of grunt work. So there are less law firm entry level jobs, but maybe more opening that require more sophisticated legal expertise that before was too expensive to house.

But I am just talking and have no idea.

Lmao. This is akin to min wage being hiked, not to sidetrack my own topic which was supposed serious/funny, machines will not foster any longterm growth. McD is already cutting people in Seattle, IIRC. Seattle has mandatory min. wage at 15 and McD cut everybody and just put kiosks in their place.

Machines do not support to overall growth, in any form, but in overall laziness. Machines being made doesnt equal smarter people to be able to work on them or work with them. You machine freaks are weird. whether you are or are not one remains to be decided lmao.

Soup2Nuts wrote:

Raiden wrote:True, automation in general creates immediate unemployment, but I'd argue it fosters long term economic growth as long as the labor market advances with the economy's needs. This is why manufacturing jobs will never be like what they were before in the US, and why service jobs shows more growth.

What that means for the specific legal market, I am not sure. Sure, doc review is less of a need, great. Lawyers are already trained on a pretty technical skill, but law firms hire entry level associates for a lot of grunt work. So there are less law firm entry level jobs, but maybe more opening that require more sophisticated legal expertise that before was too expensive to house.

But I am just talking and have no idea.

Lmao. This is akin to min wage being hiked, not to sidetrack my own topic which was supposed serious/funny, machines will not foster any longterm growth. McD is already cutting people in Seattle, IIRC. Seattle has mandatory min. wage at 15 and McD cut everybody and just put kiosks in their place.

Machines do not support to overall growth, in any form, but in overall laziness. Machines being made doesnt equal smarter people to be able to work on them or work with them. You machine freaks are weird. whether you are or are not one remains to be decided lmao.

Long term, in the aggregate, automation dramatically increases quality of life. Unfortunately, being part of the destruction part of creative destruction sucks donkey balls.

Soup2Nuts wrote:

Raiden wrote:True, automation in general creates immediate unemployment, but I'd argue it fosters long term economic growth as long as the labor market advances with the economy's needs. This is why manufacturing jobs will never be like what they were before in the US, and why service jobs shows more growth.

What that means for the specific legal market, I am not sure. Sure, doc review is less of a need, great. Lawyers are already trained on a pretty technical skill, but law firms hire entry level associates for a lot of grunt work. So there are less law firm entry level jobs, but maybe more opening that require more sophisticated legal expertise that before was too expensive to house.

But I am just talking and have no idea.

Lmao. This is akin to min wage being hiked, not to sidetrack my own topic which was supposed serious/funny, machines will not foster any longterm growth. McD is already cutting people in Seattle, IIRC. Seattle has mandatory min. wage at 15 and McD cut everybody and just put kiosks in their place.

Machines do not support to overall growth, in any form, but in overall laziness. Machines being made doesnt equal smarter people to be able to work on them or work with them. You machine freaks are weird. whether you are or are not one remains to be decided lmao.

Me? Machine Freak? Comon, it's not like my avatar is of an AI advanced robot or anything.

There is also the issue of liability - who would be responsible for malpractice?

perfunctory wrote:There is also the issue of liability - who would be responsible?

The lawyer overseeing/operating/instructing the AI. Something something reasonable man with comparable skills and experience

perfunctory wrote:There is also the issue of liability - who would be responsible for malpractice?

we'd probably see that question pop up much sooner, when an autonomous car gets into an accident. The more interesting thing in that situation though, is what decision making process it makes when it decides to either hit the kid walking along the road or the elderly lady.

Good thing everyone can become a coal miner now that America is great again

Raiden wrote:

perfunctory wrote:There is also the issue of liability - who would be responsible for malpractice?

we'd probably see that question pop up much sooner, when an autonomous car gets into an accident. The more interesting thing in that situation though, is what decision making process it makes when it decides to either hit the kid walking along the road or the elderly lady.

As long as the machines only kill/harm poor people they will likely maintain protection from any real liability. As soon as a self-driving car runs over some billionaire's dog, they will be on the hook for everything.

haus wrote:

Raiden wrote:

perfunctory wrote:There is also the issue of liability - who would be responsible for malpractice?

we'd probably see that question pop up much sooner, when an autonomous car gets into an accident. The more interesting thing in that situation though, is what decision making process it makes when it decides to either hit the kid walking along the road or the elderly lady.

As long as the machines only kill/harm poor people they will likely maintain protection from any real liability. As soon as a self-driving car runs over some billionaire's dog, they will be on the hook for everything.

I hope you dont do impact law. Negative nancy. lmao

at least when it comes to biglaw hiring, hiring will be cut down drastically since a lot of entry-level work done in these firms is exactly the type of stuff automation can cover.

either class sizes will have to decrease and/or tuition will have to decrease since there won't be enough 180K+ salary entry-level positions to go around. lol who am i kidding those greedy bastards will never cut tuition nor decrease class size.

employment prospects will worsen and LS applicants will continue to fall. many T1-4 schools will shut down.

that's a good thing though; there are way too many fucking lawyers in this country. MLGA (make lawyers great again)

MarkinKansasCity wrote:http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 0&t=233141

i have never seen this. tyft i am in tears from ketchupbot

There was a time when people thought that computers would decimate accounting jobs. It used to be that a spreadsheet was a literal sheet of paper and you needed small armies of accountants with slide rules to complete them. Computers meant that one accountant could do the job of five. But amazingly, there are still plenty of gainfully employed accountants.

It turns out that as automation allows accounting capabilities to be increased, the amount of data and work that is required to be completed increases in tandem. Regulatory requirements increase as well- many requirements that are accepted today would have been essentially impossible to comply with prior to a certain degree of automation.

I predict that law will be similar.

EDIT: sry double post