• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -101 month ago

    Creating legal documents, no. Reviewing legal documents for errors and inaccuracies totally.

    • @cley_faye
      link
      English
      91 month ago

      No, not that either. Unless you consider “use LLM to summarize the changes/errors/inaccuracies, then have a human read the whole thing again” an improvement over “just have a human read the whole thing”.

      Because LLM will do all these things:

      • point you toward issues
      • point you toward non-issues
      • not point you toward issues
      • change stuff even when “instructed” not to

      If there is one thing you don’t want to throw an LLM at without full, unbiased review, it’s documents where the wording is legally binding. And if you have to do a full, unbiased review to begin with, where you can’t even trust your tool to have highlighted all the important parts, you may as well not bother with the tool.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      51 month ago

      I really can’t see this being done by any sane person. Why would you have a generator of text reviewing stuff (besides grammar)? Do you have any reference of some companies doing this, perhaps?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -11 month ago

        Its complex pattern matching and looking up existing case law online. This work has been outsourced to contracting companies for at least 7 years that I’m aware of. If it is something that can be documented in a run book for non professionals to do for twenty cents on the dollar then there is no reason it can’t be done by a script for .002.

        • @cley_faye
          link
          English
          31 month ago

          Aside from a handful of business that tried to do that and failed miserably, some of them failing in actual court, you mean?