MacBits, Esq.

Forget about self driving trucks, buses and cars eliminating drivers jobs. Ignore battle robots, it isn’t The Terminator that’s an existential threat to humanity. No, it’s the rise of the Automated AI Lawyer:

https://www.top500.org/news/ai-proves-to-be-the-best-legal-mind-for-contract-reviews/

AI Proves to Be the Best Legal Mind for Contract Reviews
Michael Feldman | February 27, 2018 05:57 CET

Legal tech startup LawGeex has published a study demonstrating their artificial intelligence software is able to identify issues in Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) faster and more accurately than experienced lawyers.

In the study, five legal contracts were analyzed by 20 experienced lawyers, as well as the LawGeex software, to find issues referenced in the text that could suggest risk for clients – things like liability, indemnification, non-compete restrictions, and so on. The contracts used in the study were actual NDAs used by US companies, in this case Enron, Pacific Gas and Electric, Cargill, and InterGen. Prior to the test, the LawGeex AI had been trained on thousands of NDA contracts (although not these five) using machine learning and deep learning technologies.

The result: the LawGeex solution correctly identified the specificed legal issues with 94 percent accuracy compared to an average of 85 percent for the lawyers. The best lawyer actually matched LawGeex with a 94 percent score, while the lowest performing lawyer managed just 67 percent.

And the legal profession thought DIY incorporation and divorce books were a threat to their income…

“First, automate all the lawyers!”… to paraphrase The Bard…

So, will we become the compliant subjects of an overlord class of ruling legal-bots? (Have we already? How would we know? One look at Algore ought to give pause…) Will they start to run for office and develop the habit of patting their interns on the back panel? Tune in next week for our exciting conclusion: “Naughty Bits Not What You Think!” or “Would You Like More Over-Volts, My Dear?”…

Subscribe to feed

Advertisements

About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in Humor, Tech Bits and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to MacBits, Esq.

  1. H.R. says:

    So, will we become the compliant subjects of an overlord class of ruling legal-bots? (Have we already? How would we know? One look at Algore ought to give pause…)

    Quoting the Goracle: “There is no controlling legal authority.”
    Lawgeex: “Buzzzz!” Wrong!” 🤣

    When they automate judges, then we will get equality under the law. The computer can hold and analyze all laws and all relevant precedent cases and make a bulletproof decision. People won’t like that because the rulings won’t be tempered by human wisdom. Would AI think of ruling to cut the baby in half, as did Solomon, to determine the real mother? I don’t think so.

    And then there’s the time-honored tradition of bribing judges. What will you have to do; make all bribes in Bitcoin? No more brown paper bags of cash? I haven’t decided whether or not that’s a good thing./s 😜

  2. Larry Ledwick says:

    In special restricted cases I see good value for using AI. For example having an AI system scan 10’s of thousands of documents and cross reference things producing an index of related documents, and time lines.

    That sort of drudge work could be done hundreds of times faster than a room full of law interns, but there would still be a place for a knowledgeable human to find a subtle nuance in the documents that the AI screening system missed.

    Humans would be better suited to reading between the lines and seeing implied meanings rather than explicit meanings, or noticing subtle word choices which just did not feel right or in character and be indicators of a hidden agenda to be tracked down.

    Like AI being used for medical diagnosis in some cases it will be much better than your average physician for situations where symptoms follow expected patterns and circumstances, but unlike a human they won’t be able to notice unexpected signs and symptoms that the patient does not mention.

    For example in emergency medicine EMT’s sometimes reference LSTS (looks sicker than shit) in their initial patient contact evaluation. Not a specific diagnosis but at a subliminal level they pickup that something is really wrong even though the patient insists they just have a cold or are tired etc.

  3. philjourdan says:

    First, Automate all the lawyers. As AI is not human, we can then easily kill them all!

    Easy solution.

Comments are closed.