you're correct in principle (and she doesn't understand what you're saying) but you're underestimating how good the latest models are. and they will only get better

an Actually Good Lawyer like yourself can get around their inherent limitations that you accurately describe by building good prompts and including all contextual information that the LLM needs to understand the macro circumstances surrounding a case

it can't Do It All yet but it's very very useful. you have to shell out money for the latest models though

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5877562&forum_id=2~#49964076)

if he had replied with his thoughts, even in that exact place in the subthread, without the part how EnGiNeErS dOn'T uNdErStAnD tHe LaW, I would have been MUCH more likely to engage with his points about AI and legal analysis. in fact, I probably would've said, "yeah I'll defer to you about that; all I know is that AI is generally not good at Lawyering yet." but he came in and said I didn't understand the law before making his own points, so yes, I just kept trying to make him see what I was actually talking about.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5877562&forum_id=2~#49964134)

*you talk about men blowing other men, apropos of nothing*

me: "I was talking about straight sex, not gay sex"

you: "UHMMMM AKSHUALLY MEN HAVING ORAL SEX IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM 'GAY SEX' AND YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE LAW"

ok bro

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5877562&forum_id=2~#49964063)

```

There's a disconnect about what's being discussed:

Ape Arrogance was specifically responding to LTM's point about reviewing client AI-generated content

Gay of hormuz seems to be addressing the broader question of AI's role in legal work generally

Both make valid points. Gay of hormuz is right that legal analysis requires specialized knowledge that engineers might not fully grasp, and Ape Arrogance is correct that AI could potentially help with preliminary tasks even if it's not ready for full legal analysis.

The exchange is less about who's "right" and more about two different perspectives on where AI fits (or doesn't fit) in the legal workflow.

```

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5877562&forum_id=2~#49964119)

- it's slightly less likely to give you the canned, PC responses about things

- it only stores your chat history locally on your device

- it gives you access to all the frontier models, not just its own

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5877562&forum_id=2~#49964151)