logoalt Hacker News

terminalshorttoday at 11:10 AM6 repliesview on HN

This is nothing but speculation written by lawyers in the format of a scientific paper to feign legitimacy. Of course those $500 an hour nitpickers are terrified of AI because it threatens the exorbitant income of their cartel protected profession.


Replies

boelboeltoday at 11:35 AM

Tech workers know it all, no way a non-tech job could be worth anything more than 20 dollars an hour.

show 1 reply
chrisjjtoday at 1:42 PM

Threatens income? It promises to reduce costs, which will lift profit.

DannyBeetoday at 11:21 AM

Care to actually engage with the text instead of deciding to paint the entire profession with a crappy brush?

I guess i'll start with calling two well known law professors "$500 an hour nitpickers" when they don't earn 500 an hour and have been professors for 15+ years (20+ in Jessica's case), so aren't earning anything close to 500 an hour, is not a great start?

I don't know if they are nitpickers, i've never taken their classes :)

Also, this is an op-ed, not a science paper. Which you'd know if you had bothered to read it at all.

You say elsewhere you didn't bother to read anything other than the abstract, because "you didn't need to", so besides being a totally uninformed opinion, complaining about something else being speculation when you are literally speculating on the contents of the paper is pretty ironic.

I also find it amazingly humorous given that Jessica's previous papers on IP has been celebrated by HN, in part because she roughly believes copyright/patents as they currently exist are all glorified BS that doesn't help anything, and has written many papers as to why :)

show 1 reply
well_ackshuallytoday at 11:30 AM

Please go to court using only ChatGPT as legal defense, I'd love to see it, it's going to make for great entertainment. The judge a little bit less so.

You can criticise the hourly cost of lawyers all you like, and it should be a beautiful demonstration to people like you that no, "high costs means more people go into the profession and lower the costs" is not and has never been a reality. But to think that any AI could ever be efficient in a system such common law, the most batshit insane, inefficient, "rethoric matters more than logic" system is delusional.

show 1 reply
__loamtoday at 11:16 AM

Enough people have gotten owned for using these things in court that I think the more likely response is laughing at the ignorance then feeling threatened.

show 1 reply
__0x01today at 11:22 AM

> This is nothing but speculation

Did you read the paper?

show 1 reply