The opening wage gap since the 70s have pathed the way for this. Raising wages could have paid for free produced products, but the haves decided that freedom for the have-nots has a price point.
Im just not made for this world, how and were can i outsource this ability to decipher legalesee somone willing to fix this for me for money, without exceeding the value gained?
At the bitter bottles bottom waits the truths for those who seek. Socrates the greek.
All situation stakeholders involved want to escalate, thinking themselves the winner ones the smoke clears. Romantic narratives replace situational awareness, as the generation who experienced a similar escalation leaves the stage.
Eh, what if it was trained on all the previous cases ever to have existed? I think it could be pretty good, as long as it detects novelty as a to flag and confirm error case.
That's not the point. LLMs work by predicting what text to generate next. It doesn't work by choosing facts, it works by saying the thing that sounds the most appropriate. That's why it's so confidently wrong. No amount of training will eliminate this problem: it's an issue with the architecture of LLMs today.
You could layer another system on top of the LLM generations that attempts to look up cases referenced and discards the response if they don't exist, but that only solves that particular failure mode.
There are other kinds of failures that will be much harder to detect: arguments that sound right but are logically flawed, lost context due to inability to read body language and tone of voice, and lack of a coherent strategy, to name a few.
All of these things could theoretically be solved individually, but each would require new systems to be added which have their own new failure modes. At our current technological level the problem is intractable, even for seemingly simple cases like this one. A defendant is better off defending themselves with their own preparation than they are relying on modern AI in the heat of the moment.
It’s bizarre that anyone that supposedly works in technology even thinks this is realistic. This betrays a large lack of knowledge of technology and a child like understanding of the legal system.
It fails at determining if a number is prime and provides bogus arguments to such effect. You think it would make sense for this to argue complex legal cases with strategy? This isn’t Go or chess.
The countries affected the most will pioneer this and the same mechanism that kept us from acting against the free market carbon death cult, will prevent measures against it.
Then all it takes, is one slip up, one bad year, and all of humanity burns to ash in a fire storm.
Use the obsessive phases, find a topic that is overlapping with your obsessions and cram every new obsession into that project. Yes, it leads to cluttered projects, but suddenly you are that developer driving that open source project in mono-mode.
The alternative was producing good products, engaging with creative people and pushing confrontational content. Its always safer to produce content for the current ruling dogmatic institution, aka working for the church.
The funny thing is, the companies themselves muddy the water significantly. By buying critic websites, critics and and raising there own numbers for cultural relevance and viewers. But money does not lie, and as soon as the audience has to pay for something, the real viewerbase shows some streaming empires naked.
