83,435
edits
Outstanding: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
So, actually, it ''wouldn’t'' make a good play at all. It really, really wouldn’t. | So, actually, it ''wouldn’t'' make a good play at all. It really, really wouldn’t. | ||
What it ''would'' make is an excellent case study in why the legal industry has no need, whatsoever, to fear the revolutionary impact of [[large language model]]s. | What it ''would'' make is an excellent case study in why the legal industry has ''no'' need, whatsoever, to fear the revolutionary impact of [[large language model]]s. Why? Because of the [[Buttocractic oath|Buttocractic Oath]]. Legal discourse does not proceed according to tenets of crystalline logic. It proceeds according to the posterior-covering, even-if-it-is-broke-I-won’t-get-in-trouble-as-long-as-I-wasn’t-the-one-who-tried-to-fix-it [[fear]] of those engaged in the professional services industry. | ||
{{Sa}} | {{Sa}} | ||
* [[Conservation of tedium|The law of conservation of tedium]] | * [[Conservation of tedium|The law of conservation of tedium]] | ||