82,853
edits
Natural language processing: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|tech|}}A great hope of [[reg tech]] is [[natural language processing]], which presents itself in a handful of varieties of the same thing: a machine that reads {{t|contract}}s for you. | {{g}}{{a|tech|}}A great hope of [[reg tech]] is [[natural language processing]], which presents itself in a handful of varieties of the same thing: a machine that reads {{t|contract}}s for you. | ||
===Examples=== | ===Examples=== | ||
| Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
The basic insight here is that if a process is sufficiently low in value that experienced personnel are not justified, it should be fully automated rather than partially automated and populated by inexperienced personnel | The basic insight here is that if a process is sufficiently low in value that experienced personnel are not justified, it should be fully automated rather than partially automated and populated by inexperienced personnel | ||
===What is it with [[Confi]]s?=== | |||
Note this [[natural language processing]] only every seems to work with [[confidentiality agreement]]s — surely the most pointless legal contracts — wait, wait: hear me out folks — one will encounter in a daily grind. They are well known for only containing the same 6 points — an infinite means of saying them. One never sues<ref>Well: have ''you'' ever sued, or been sued under one?</ref> under a [[confidentiality agreement]] because the loss you would suffer under them is by definition a [[consequential loss]] shot through with your own [[contributory negligence]]. | |||
{{ref}} | {{ref}} | ||