@lawtomated Profile picture

lawtomated

@lawtomated

🎓 #Legaltech education | 🧠 #Legaltechnology 101s | ⚖️ #Law + 💻 #Coding | ⚙️ #legalops | 💡#legalinnovation | ⚡#changemanagement | 💼 legaltech #careers

Similar User
Legal Tech StartUp Focus photo

@LegalTechStrtUp

Nicola Shaver photo

@Nicola_Shaver

LegalTechHub photo

@LegalTechHub1

Gavel photo

@Gavel_io

Warren Agin photo

@AnalyticLaw

Global Legaltech Hub photo

@Glegaltechhub

Natalie Anne Knowlton photo

@natalalleycat

Legal Geek photo

@wearelegalgeek

Artificial Lawyer photo

@ArtificialLawya

Jack Shepherd photo

@jackwshepherd

Nicole Bradick photo

@NicoleBradick

Colin S. Levy photo

@Clevy_Law

Tom Martin photo

@lawdroid

Proxy Legal photo

@proxylegalapp

Trellis photo

@trellis_law

lawtomated Reposted

Posting this from a talk I did a couple of weeks ago on legal tech + AI without hype youtube.com/watch?v=iNKvLz…


lawtomated Reposted

BREAKING: Stating that they had "lost confidence" in his ability to lead the board of OpenAI has removed Sam Altman as CEO, effective immediately. Check back for the full story to follow:

Tweet Image 1

Encountering lots of "LLM" use cases that are solvable or better/necessarily solved via search, yet stakeholders convinced they need an LLM. E.g. find our best precedent X or Y doc or clause that fits A, B and, C parameters. Not the same as generate random one that has A, B, C.


lawtomated Reposted

Practical ways to incentivise lawyers to be more innovative…start here, don’t start with the tech jackwshepherd.medium.com/practical-ways…


lawtomated Reposted

As usual @AlexHamiltonRad is spot on here. In-house lawyers are the ones with the greatest incentive to complicate, because it makes what they do special, and beyond the ken of legal ops folk, who are muggles and can't second-guess wizardry.

A version of history with in-house lawyers valiantly shortening terms and making them more reasonable, only to be overridden by those pesky outsourcers and legal ops folk, doesn't exactly stand up to scrutiny



True! Buying or deploying is the easier part. Generating adoption that generates meaningful business value is the hard part, yet mostly unreported.

Buying or deploying a tool is not the same thing as adopting a tool



lawtomated Reposted

Lots of people talking about use cases, lots of people meaning something different by this term. Here's what I think a use case is not, and what a use case is


lawtomated Reposted

Law firms, having failed to do the hard work on incentives, data, or purpose, are excited that LLMs might save them... Yup, that will definitely work

What use cases are innovation leaders at law firms most excited about when it comes to large language models? At #CANLIF2023, firms consistently most excited about pointing LLMs at unstructured data, finding valuable insights that were previously not visible. #data #AI



lawtomated Reposted

Most law firms struggle with even basic things like timekeeping, email filing, writing descriptive email subjects etc. Yes, AI will help with all of that but we’re still dealing with rudimentary stuff. I think a lot of people are *seriously* overestimating capacity for change.

If business failure or dramatic reduction at a major legal industry incumbent is coming, what should we be looking for as a leading indicator? linkedin.com/posts/colinlac…



lawtomated Reposted

Prediction: AI is going to set back law firms and law tech companies 5 years of progress they would otherwise have made if they hadn't pivoted to their entire objective being "deploy AI"


lawtomated Reposted

The AI will replace lawyers narrative is for people who neither understand tech, nor law. You can build better prompts when you can evaluate the output. LLMs Will lead to a 5-20% efficiency dividend, which is *huge* but much less sexy than replacing lawyers


lawtomated Reposted

Yep, on the one hand there are techbros who don’t understand law who think they can suddenly do it, and on the other hand are lawyers who actually don’t quite understand tech but want to pretend they do. I don’t see these claims from people who BOTH practice law AND build AI.


lawtomated Reposted

Fascinating read about how smaller open source models that can be incrementally retrained may have the eventual edge.

Leaked Google document: “We Have No Moat, And Neither Does OpenAI” The most interesting thing I've read recently about LLMs - a purportedly leaked document from a researcher at Google talking about the huge strategic impact open source models are having simonwillison.net/2023/May/4/no-…



Is twitter now exclusively for LLM / AI / ChatGPT / AutoGPT content? It seems so. The irony of this post contributing to that theme does not escape me 😭


lawtomated Reposted

"The best applications of this technology are not likely to come from a top-down analysis identifying processes to change – although we may find some – they are more likely to come from people using them and finding their own best uses" afr.com/companies/prof…


lawtomated Reposted

Ever wonder why groundbreaking tech can sometimes lead to increased *complexity* instead of increased simplicity? With today's breakneck speed of AI proliferation, should we watch out for contexts where this phenomenon may occur? History has some lessons for us... 🧵


lawtomated Reposted

It is curious that when an exciting new technology comes along, sometimes we forget about analysing problems…“how can we deliver value” morphs into a different question, namely “how can we deliver value using this particular piece of technology” read.uberflip.com/i/1496203-spri… @ILTANet


Loading...

Something went wrong.


Something went wrong.