The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
rate this terrifying twitter post about AI completely ending the "law" professio
| Frat Leader | 02/13/26 |
| Frat Leader | 02/13/26 |
| Emotionally + Physically Abusive Ex-Husband | 02/13/26 |
| Shlomo Dreidlowitz | 02/13/26 |
| Patel Philippe | 02/13/26 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: February 13th, 2026 11:21 AM Author: Frat Leader https://x.com/deredleritt3r/status/2022314279668519076
As a lawyer who uses LLMs every day at work, I feel qualified to respond.
First, hallucinations are no longer a problem. Consistent with the prediction you quoted from 2023, GPT-5.x almost never hallucinates. And overall, the percentage of inaccurate responses I get from GPT-5.2 Pro is lower than the percentage of inaccurate responses I would get from a competent junior associate (yes, fully accounting for hallucinations).
Second, people wildly overestimate the difficulty of most tasks performed by lawyers. The vast majority of the things we do are not nearly as challenging intellectually as solving an Erdos problem. Key skills for a lawyer are attention to detail, ability to synthesize and reason through precedent, ability to construct logical arguments, writing, research. LLMs are *very* good at most of these things even today, and top-tier LLMs (GPT-5.2 Pro) are excellent at them.
Put in another way, I feel that the biggest barrier to widespread adoption of AI by lawyers today is connectivity, interfaces, harnesses - *not* intelligence of the best models, and certainly not hallucinations. Unclear to what extent these issues will be resolved in the next 12-18 months, but given how economically valuable lawyers' work is, I wouldn't be surprised to see significant progress on that front. It's also worth considering that, given the general trend of rapidly falling costs of running reasoning models, it is likely that a model as intelligent as GPT-5.2 Pro, but *much* cheaper and faster, will be publicly available in the next 12-18 months.
Note that the above assumes (conservatively) that the next 12-18 months in AI will be relatively boring: no continual learning, no drop-in virtual employees, not much further progress in agentic AI (Codex), no significant progress in intelligence possessed by the best models. Relaxing these assumptions would mean that we should expect even faster progress. |
Date: February 13th, 2026 11:31 AM Author: Frat Leader (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5834424&forum_id=2most#49668196) |
|
Date: February 13th, 2026 11:41 AM Author: Emotionally + Physically Abusive Ex-Husband (oppose bitchbois) I rate it as "write me a 200-word Tweet saying that I'm a lawyer and that ChatGPT is good at doing the things lawyers do and doesn't hallucinate." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5834424&forum_id=2most#49668222) |
|
Date: February 13th, 2026 11:49 AM Author: Shlomo Dreidlowitz His whole argument is predicated on the "high value of legal work" so it's without foundation. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5834424&forum_id=2most#49668239) |
|
Date: February 13th, 2026 11:51 AM Author: Patel Philippe I used AI heavily to oppose an MSJ recently. Defense firm was highly specialized and extremely obvious they used AI in their reply brief and evidentiary objections. It was a much less sophisticated model than I was using but I don't expect that to be the case in 12-18 months. Had another lower stakes case with a minute order that contained a million AI artifacts.
This is the future of all litigation and it could be closer to next month than next year. It's going to be a death race when 80% of lawyers figure this out and are all sprinting to max out their AI game at the same time. |