Template:M intro work Large Learning Model: Difference between revisions

Template:M intro work Large Learning Model (view source)

Revision as of 16:05, 21 July 2023

517 bytes added , 21 July 2023

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,892

edits

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 Is this it? Will it be [[ChatGPT]] that does for our learned friends what the meteor did to the dinosaurs?
-We are not convinced. Those making this prediction do not ask the question: “[[cui bono]]?”
+We are not convinced. Before going nap on this prediction first ask: “[[cui bono]]?”
+====Cui bono====
 ''Who benefits'', primarily, from this emergent technology?
@@ Line 48: / Line 48: @@
 Chat GPT may disrupt a lot of things, but it won’t be disrupting the legal profession any time soon.
+====Who’s client? Oh, right: she’s a lawyer, too.====
+“But, [[JC]], come on. Be realistic. It is dog-eat-dog out there. Any lawyer keeps the bounty of the [[LLM]] from her clients will soon have her lunch eaten by others who won’t. You cannot fight the invisible hand.” We race to the bottom.
+But do we? Ignoring how impervious to the invisible hand all other recent technologies have been, just remember who the clients are, and what their interests are. Consumers of high-end commercial legal services are not, generally, the permanently bamboozled [[Muggle|muggles]] of common myth. Most are ''themselves'' lawyers, inhabiting weaponised legal departments mainly comprised of veteran deal lawyers.
-Bear in mind ''who'' ChatGPT would be disrupting in this case. Two things about consumers of high-end commercial legal services.
+These people ''also'' take pride in their ability to work with difficult, complicated things. This is how they prove their worth to their employers too. Lawyer and clients, that is to say, has a common interest in convolution for its own sake. Lawyers — [[Inhouse counsel|inhouse]] or [[Outhouse counsel|out]] — are the jazz aficionados of text; ''cinéastes'' of syntax. They expect overwrought contracts: nothing says “prudent management of existential risk” like eighty page of 10pt Times New Roman.
-:(1) Most of them — us — are lawyers
-:(2) As lawyers they — we — take pride in the ability to work with difficult, complicated things. Convolution is a measure of our worth. The love of convolution for its own sake, for what it says about us, is a strong common value between lawyers and their commercial clients.
-Lawyers — [[Inhouse counsel|inhouse]] or [[Outhouse counsel|out]] — are the jazz aficionados of text; cineastes of syntax. Overwrought contracts are expected: nothing says “prudent management of existential risk” like forty page of 10pt Times Roman. Plain language is not for serious people.
+[[Plain English]] is not for [[serious people]].
-That is to say, neither fee-earning lawyers nor their immediate clients want plain contracts. If they did, we would already have them.
+Neither fee-earning lawyers nor their immediate clients want simple contracts. If they did, we would already have them.