165 points vertigoruntime 1 hour ago 151 comments

pletnes 1 hour ago | parent

Just like breaking crypto in the age of cloud is more about cost than time, this will lead to legal attacks based on the same principle. The biggest wallet wins.

mcmcmc 1 hour ago | parent

That’s how the legal system in the US has always worked though

xmprt 1 hour ago | parent

> The biggest wallet wins

This was already always the case. If anything, making this more accessible will reduce the barrier to entry for whether or not it's worth your time to take on a case. Instead of 50 lawyers spending 100s of hours on a case, you can have 1 or 2 lawyers + Astra working on it and if there's a case you can add more real lawyers.

3asgfq 1 hour ago | parent

There are other possibilities:

1) Lawyers are not as naive as software engineers and will fight being replaces by new laws.

2) If they are replaced, OpenAI will take a cut commensurate with the amount in dispute (OAI, please credit me for the idea in the IPO brochure).

xmprt 1 hour ago | parent

Many lawyers are owners/partners compared with software engineers who are more like cogs in the machine. They also bill hourly/contingency per case compared to engineers who are salaried. If a partner in a firm thinks they can take on more cases because of AI assistance then they will because that's just more money in their pockets.

umeshunni 1 hour ago | parent

That's already the case in law because you could just hire the best or most lawyers.

drakythe 1 hour ago | parent

With regard to certain legal questions this has always been the case. AT&T Fought the US Government for 20 years and eventually won because the government gave up. Without some kind of national anti-SLAPP law we're all one irritated oligarch away from having our lives financially ruined.

I am curious what level of trust established law firms treat LLMs with.

bezko 1 hour ago | parent

Will it be able to sue itself?

kansface 1 hour ago | parent

That’s a great question for Astra for Law.

submeta 1 hour ago | parent

Will these models eventually replace all knowledge work, leaving lawyers, doctors, product managers, software developers, and others out of a job?

If the benefits were shared across humanity, that could bring us closer to utopia. My worry is that we’ll instead end up with a handful of even wealthier billionaires and millions of people out of work.

cjjuice 1 hour ago | parent

Just a few years ago people were paying 400k for pictures of apes. We always make up new stuff to spend money on.

ceejayoz 1 hour ago | parent

You know most of that was wash trading, right?

cidd 1 hour ago | parent

True, unless you're a surgeon.

rsoto2 1 hour ago | parent

I mean that's what all of these execs are openly telling everyone: they want you out of work, they want their ai to be the one to bring the world to it's knees, they want to surveille every second of your day, they want killer drones to use, they want to lay all of your cities to rubble and build "paradises" on top of them like in gaza.

They also openly tell you what they are afraid of btw: collective worker power. something that is massively lacking in our industry, although i feel like it would be one of the easiest industries to unionize in terms of # of workers.

Interesting interview I just watched about how powerful and dangerous these "wishes" or "prophecies" are especially in the hands of the ultra-wealthy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eR7grHa1NR0

rfgplk 1 hour ago | parent

> Will these models eventually replace all knowledge work, leaving lawyers, doctors, product managers, software developers, and others out of a job?

Effectively yes, in the current forms. Those professions will likely evolve, but the traditional forms (ie writing code by hand, writing law filings by hand etc) are all dead.

superxpro12 1 hour ago | parent

in that case, legal cases would just come down to who has more compute lol. Many times cases win on their merits, but we've also seen evidence where overwhelming legal pressure can influence cases.

spongebobstoes 1 hour ago | parent

bigger spender already has a huge advantage, up to millions of dollars

this is more likely to democratize the legal system by reducing the cost of a good legal team

raphman 29 minutes ago | parent

May I just note that there are other jurisdictions on this planet that are less money-biased than than the US one but will be disrupted by law-LLMs as well?

It seems much more probable to me that these LLMs will make good things worse than that they will make bad things better.

andriy_koval 12 minutes ago | parent

> Those professions will likely evolve, but the traditional forms (ie writing code by hand, writing law filings by hand etc)

there will still be writing initial and incremental prompts by hands, until and if LLMs surpass humans in all intellectual functions.

rsecora 1 hour ago | parent

If we have enough energy and raw materials to keep building, yes, it will be an utopia made real. But if there is energy scarcity, then other two outcomes can arise.

porkshoe 1 hour ago | parent

This also assumes that the AI owners _want_ a global utopia, or that governments will enforce that outcome.

As it stands, it seems far more likely to result in a wonderful life for a few, and an absolute catastrophe for most.

rsecora 38 minutes ago | parent

XIX century dickensian society and Gilded Age barons were replaced by the time of the New Deal.

siva7 1 hour ago | parent

No, it will only leave those without a professional license jobless. Like software developers.

spiderice 49 minutes ago | parent

Doubt it. When someone can go to Astra MD for 75% of what they used to go to the doctor for, then the remaining doctors only have 25% as many visits. When doctors only have 25% as many visits, they have to compete on price and they make less per visit.

Same argument for plumbers. Everyone always jokes about what a good time it is to be a plumber. But what happens when all the software engineers turn to plumbing? Suddenly it's not such a good time to be a plumber anymore.

cbg0 1 hour ago | parent

No word on model hallucinations in the blog post.

https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/gpt-6-astra?omniscience...

pelagicAustral 1 hour ago | parent

Not like common law doesnt already have a lot of hallucination going on.

cobbzilla 1 hour ago | parent

can “penumbras and emanations” compete with hallucinations?

ch4s3 1 hour ago | parent

Common law is all about rummaging around in dead mens’ letters, LLMs are a natural fit.

alexfringes 37 minutes ago | parent

Genuinely wondering (aka not snarky): Has anyone found frontier models to provide useful research in the context of European civil law systems?

Your comment made me wonder if there are any halfway-acceptable model benchmarks for law tasks? Specifically I’d love to know how the frontier models’ abilities compare between common law vs. civil law systems. My guess would be that an AI in a common law context should have a clearer idea of how a specific case is interpreted/accepted by (common law) practitioners, whereas trying to rely on AI in a civil law context, like Germany, can be daunting. In a few Germany-specific recent examples, the models feel like they present only (maybe too stubbornly?) the “civil law”-based laws. All while negating much of AI’s research benefits because civil statutes are portrayed as being absolutely accurate, binding, and their enforcement (and thereby the legal reality) being uniformly applied. Am I making this interpretation up? If so, how can I prove myself wrong?

heaney-555 1 hour ago | parent

The benchmark you linked to shows GPT-6 Astra having the lowest hallucination rate of all tested models.

jdiff 1 hour ago | parent

The blog post makes no mention. If the rate isn't 0% it should be mentioned for a field like this.

TomGarden 1 hour ago | parent

Agreed. Hallucinations and reliability are the main hurdles to anything being 'agi' in my book

Tanjreeve 44 minutes ago | parent

The definition of AGI is whatever a frontier lab wrote a blog about doing in the last week.

simianwords 43 minutes ago | parent

why this maximalism? There's nothing that has 0% hallucination including humans. lets use reasonable baselines.

drakythe 38 minutes ago | parent

Humans can be sanctioned and fined, and eventually disbarred if they continue to lie in court filings.

john_strinlai 23 minutes ago | parent

presumably that will remain true for the lawyers using the product

jrflo 1 hour ago | parent

Does hallucination matter for this application? We've moved beyond raw recall being that important, it seems like for law specifically all relevant facts will be cited and checked easily by humans.

Implicated 1 hour ago | parent

> it seems like for law specifically all relevant facts will be cited and checked easily by humans.

Don't be too sure about that. [0]

0: https://www.damiencharlotin.com/hallucinations/

jakevoytko 13 minutes ago | parent

> all relevant facts will be cited and checked easily by humans

I've talked to a lawyer about how they handle this. They do indeed double-check everything, since it'd be embarrassing (or worse) to send hallucinated statements to opposing council or to the court. They still find the assembly a huge time saver

But based on stories in the news on the subject, not everyone has this same level of diligence

railgunmerlin 1 hour ago | parent

Interesting to see the callout to companies like harvey in the post itself as consumers rather than competitors? I guess openai isn't quite willing to step into those customer relations themselves?

boredumb 1 hour ago | parent

memes and snark aside, can you use this to create legitimate terms and contracts for my products and if I do who is getting sued when it is wrong?

hackmack10 1 hour ago | parent

I already use them for that, they are pretty excellent at it. Much better than the terms of use generator products that used to exist. That said, nobody cares to sue your business for the most part until you're big enough to be worth it. By that time, you'll have a team of legal analyst to assist you... or agents should I say.

Then again, nobody will have money to buy anything at this rate, so in all liklihood, this is a total non-issue.

dolebirchwood 1 hour ago | parent

> who is getting sued when it is wrong?

You. Don't take legal advice from a word calculator.

echelon 1 hour ago | parent

The business value will be when platforms can underwrite their LLMs' legal products.

That will be a decacorn product or more.

mcmcmc 48 minutes ago | parent

That or a hydrogen balloon of financial engineering

kingstnap 45 minutes ago | parent

As opposed to taking advice from the glucose wetware?

notahacker 35 minutes ago | parent

The glucose wetware will actually fight your case...

animal_spirits 32 minutes ago | parent

Wetware is a new phrase that both horrifies me and makes me crack up in laughter :)

Ajedi32 19 minutes ago | parent

Yes, because glucose wetware can be held liable for malpractice if it gives you nonsensical advise.

petcat 1 hour ago | parent

You will be the one getting sued. It's just a tool.

gr_norm 1 hour ago | parent

I'd expect they could indemnify you against hallucinations or similar if this gets good enough for that to be a very rare occurrence? Or you could buy insurance on it that's cheaper than hiring a lawyer (not a high bar to clear). I wouldn't rely on it currently, though.

raincole 1 hour ago | parent

> can you use this to create legitimate terms

I don't think you can. What I get from this article is that this is not a product they're going to sell to average consumers.

Thaxll 1 hour ago | parent

Same for SWE when pushing code they don't understand.

reticulates 1 hour ago | parent

charlesdenault 1 hour ago | parent

You are.

huseyinkeles 1 hour ago | parent

when you shoot someone with a gun, who gets sued? you? or the gun manufacturer?

binlog 29 minutes ago | parent

The product isn’t meant for you or me it is for lawyers. If you can’t take personal liability for a badly written contract then you shouldn’t be using it.

epolanski 7 minutes ago | parent

You can create terms and contracts even if you're a 7 year old with no AI.

And yes, even contracts drafted for millions of $ have oversights and unlawful or unenforceable terms.

hackmack10 1 hour ago | parent

People that are saying OpenAI is screwed because a lack of profit, I'm not of that opinion. They are encroaching on every industry they can. They have name brand recognition, a huge user base and are showing they can be a valuable tool to all types of businesses.

As much as I hate to see it. They are now threatening industries like Engineers, Game Developers, Accountants, 3D modelers, 3D animators, Video Production, Audio Production, Therapist, Tax Auditors, Journalists, Authors, Artists, Mathematicians, Product managers, Every type of analyst and pretty much any other job that can be done behind a computer screen.

We have big problems for humanity.

superxpro12 1 hour ago | parent

I'd kill for an AI that can tell me how to fix shit on my own, with proper permitting and building codes factored in.

hackmack10 1 hour ago | parent

I used ChatGPT the other day to resink a CPU with termal paste, replace a PSU in my PC and snake my kitchen sink from the wall. I didn't exactly need it's help but wanted someone looking over my shoulder so to speak. It can help you repair all types of stuff, but as far as county / building codes and such, that probably isn't far off. It seems to understand things quite well.

swed420 1 hour ago | parent

> We have big problems for humanity.

The biggest problem is that we're conditioned by a paradigm that frames these as problems.

mawadev 1 hour ago | parent

I think the future is going to look pretty boring, we are all going to review and put our signature below LLM generated output...

WarmWash 1 hour ago | parent

By that point money ceases to have value, because the value of money comes from the motivation it gives people to work. If AI does everything, then money is useless (unless AI like money for some reason).

trinari 52 minutes ago | parent

There will still be a need to distribute and exchange ressources, goods and services.

Real estate, food, energy, mobility.

That will be done with money. Or violence. Either way, a scary future to people when labor doesn't provide any value. Elon promises abundance, but what can he do against greed?

esafak 47 minutes ago | parent

People are still going to be motivated to eat and have shelter.

WarmWash 22 minutes ago | parent

Of course, but who (what?) is going to make the food and the shelter?

andriy_koval 17 minutes ago | parent

there are always be next frontier of problems which require creativity, unless AI become supersmart completely make humans redundant in all cognitive functions.

ReptileMan 1 hour ago | parent

As one wise man said - the oldest profession will also be the last to go.

ai-x 37 minutes ago | parent

Most HNers are clueless that if you have Top Talent + Capital you already have an insurmountable moat. OpenAI, SpaceX, Anthropic all have that and none of the regular guys can compete against them (if they choose to attack that industry)

jumploops 1 hour ago | parent

The courts are about to overrun with AI-generated lawsuits (even more so than they have been[0]).

[0]https://www.technologyreview.com/2026/06/04/1138391/courts-c...

pampas 1 hour ago | parent

They seem unaccountable. Every other profession has increased their productivity.

officeplant 1 hour ago | parent

>Every other profession has increased their productivity.

You dropped this /s

diegolas 22 minutes ago | parent

justice doesn't have to be productive it has to be fair

MiSeRyDeee 18 minutes ago | parent

how so? delayed justice is denied justice

RugnirViking 17 minutes ago | parent

It's completely failing at that too. Public trust in the courts is lower than it's ever been, and it was never all that high to begin with

ngruhn 1 hour ago | parent

Why the hell are they not fighting fire with fire? This is not sustainable. But it is annoying that the AI labs get to play arms dealer, selling to both sides.

toasty228 55 minutes ago | parent

How are we fighting it online? You cannot

b112 38 minutes ago | parent

It'll be like radar detector detector detectors, which were a thing for a while. Each side (cops, speeder) buying detectors to detect the detectors.

paimapi 1 hour ago | parent

you could probably write a cool little gotcha of an SF short story about a barren wasteland of a planet that keeps broadcasting out legalese that's revealed to just be LLM chatbot lawyers pedantically arguing with one another about xeno legal doctrine

notahacker 38 minutes ago | parent

JG Ballard could probably turn that into something darkly atmospheric, and even more dystopic than his usual depopulated worlds...

Jordan-117 18 minutes ago | parent

mt_ 45 minutes ago | parent

The legal system, which is a machine/technology by itself, will be eaten out. I wonder what will replace it. Botnet law arbitrage? – Personal assistants constantly negotiating with each other to avoid permanent civil lawsuits?

the cost of making a legal argument can collapse while the cost of reaching an enforceable, legitimate decision may go higher, which will gate the "justice" system even more.

pbkompasz 28 minutes ago | parent

Call it a Prediction Market

alexfringes 27 minutes ago | parent

You presented the concern from my adjacent comment perfectly (“LLM performance: common law vs civil law” essentially). So is AI possibly just growing the “Reverence for Professional Experience” factor that plays such a big role for legal compensation here in the US?

WolfeReader 22 minutes ago | parent

I am not sure "eaten out" was the correct phrase to use here.

iphonecorridor 15 minutes ago | parent

The legal system is slow and inefficient by design.

JumpCrisscross 13 minutes ago | parent

The legal system is robust and deliberate by design. The result is it winds up being slow. But it doesn't need to be inefficient.

sva_ 17 minutes ago | parent

I find the idea that people can use LLMs to exercise their rights as citizens appealing however. Many people aren't aware of the rights they have, and LLMs are pretty good at surfacing some stuff without having to pay lawyers. Having to hire a lawyer is imo actually a huge way of gatekeeping people from exercising their rights. I heard a lot of local German public institutions are currently being flooded with people arguing their case with the help of LLM that they previously weren't really realistically able to do. So I don't see it all as bad.

aucisson_masque 16 minutes ago | parent

Don’t you have fee when initiating a lawsuit ?

I don’t know in the USA but in France, if it’s deemed that you launched a lawsuit knowing very well it wouldn’t succeed, you are susceptible to get a 10k€ fine. Even jail in serious cases.

piker 1 hour ago | parent

Second paragraph:

> API customers including Harvey and Legora will be able to build on Astra for Law, bringing this intelligence into their own products and workflows.

In other words: "no, no, we're not eating our children to prep for the IPO. Don't worry."

forrestthewoods 1 hour ago | parent

If there is any cartel that deserves to be broken its legal search. May they die a miserable death.

elpakal 1 hour ago | parent

> By using the legal search index, Astra for Law can search U.S. case law, statutes, regulations, court rules, and administrative decisions across a corpus of more than 230 million URLs, with sources added daily. Our work with Free Law Project, the nonprofit behind CourtListener, brings its case-law collection covering more than 99.9% of published U.S. precedential case law (opens in a new window) into this research experience.

Found that to be very interesting

rayiner 9 minutes ago | parent

[delayed]

ericd 1 hour ago | parent

Yeah, it should be freely available, you have to be able to know the rules you're supposed to obey in order to obey them well. I've been making a free API for US law search, you can point whatever model you want at it: https://law.agentlookups.ai/

Very much a work in progress, only federal and state so far, no municipal codes yet, and no case law yet. Big hole, I know. Also working on making the search ranking work better.

manyatoms 59 minutes ago | parent

is there a dataset/torrent with all the underlying laws?

ericd 56 minutes ago | parent

Right now it's just a bunch of crawlers for the individual states. If there's interest, I could periodically stand up snapshot torrents or something. That something you'd be interested in?

Alternatively, if someone else knows an all-in-one option that exists, I wouldn't mind retiring those crawlers...

timschmidt 52 minutes ago | parent

Not op, but that's a very interesting proposition. While the law and legal code are technically property of the people, I'm not aware of any single point of download for it all.

rayiner 38 minutes ago | parent

There’s no single point of download for it all because there’s thousands of autonomous entities that issue law and adjudicate cases, at least 51 of them distinct sovereign entities.

datsci_est_2015 24 minutes ago | parent

We could enforce (suggest?) a common format / api at the federal level. Especially if it’s incentivized with funding that more than justifies the cost of maintenance. Similar to how federal interstate funding is only available to states with a 21+ drinking age.

qingcharles 17 minutes ago | parent

There is none, not for statutes and definitely not for case law; even at the appellate level where you have multiple federal circuits, then 50 states, then territories, military, tribal and a whole host of other niche courts. And the appellate court systems can be split into districts, and by lower and higher levels.

Then if you want to really get into it, The People should also be able to access trial court level, and at that point you have over 3000 distinct court systems with their own access systems, usually requiring logins and CAPTCHAs, and half of them not even having anything accessible online at all, and the other half only having recent stuff online and the rest rotting in a flooded basement.

tfehring 7 minutes ago | parent

https://axiom.org is working on this but very early.

teiferer 32 minutes ago | parent

Let's swap it out for the AI cartel!

jmkd 50 minutes ago | parent

Max Junestrand has consistently said Legora treats the model layer as swappable, selecting across frontier providers rather than building the product around one.

OpenAI didn't need to name Legora and Harvey in the second paragraph of the launch post.

They are pre-empting the obvious interpretation of Astra for Law: that moving this far up the legal stack puts them in direct competition with their biggest legal AI customers.

“Don't worry, they can build on us” is a pretty conspicuous message to include on launch day.

They have clearly thought about some pessimistic outcomes.

JumpCrisscross 14 minutes ago | parent

"We are also expanding our work on privacy and governance to give law firms specific controls for confidential client work"

This is everything OpenAI have to say about privacy in this announcement. No guarantees. No promises. Just a pinky-swear promise.

Anyone trusting them–or a lawyer who relies on them–for legal work deserves what they get.

dzonga 1 hour ago | parent

open-ai have proven they can make good / decent models but business strategy is just spray and pray.

they need to pick a lane and optimize for it. coz at their size they can't serve the application layer (a.i startups who can fine-tune models will eat their lunch)

if they gonna do a consumer play - then go ham on that.

otherwise they're gonna get caught in the dreaded middle valley.

estetlinus 1 hour ago | parent

Do they still do Atlas, the web browser? They are indeed throwing shit at the wall, seeing what stick.

scrollop 1 hour ago | parent

a la Google.

noir_lord 31 minutes ago | parent

Google went to that model after they had a massive cash cow though.

You can afford to play silly buggers when you have dumpster trucks of money backing up to your door every day see also: Meta.

Tanjreeve 30 minutes ago | parent

I think the comparison is unfair. Google had/have a product that was 10X better than anything else at the point of release (search then chrome). And they have several money making products like YouTube and android that are either singular or in a duopoly.

OpenAI doesn't have any of these things. They have products that they're paying for customers when the market they're in is rapidly converging on fighting for API reasoning as part of enterprise systems and fighting a race to the bottom for fickle consumer solutions that will be eaten by open source once they have to make money.

Maybe they had a brief window for dominance of information search (or maybe it was only ever going to last as long as Google releasing all their internal research) and maybe they had a brief moment of monopoly till Anthropic got going but theyre not in the same dominance position as Google.

tuesdaynight 35 minutes ago | parent

They have a lot of compute, so I think it makes sense to spray and see what works. Anthropic is limited in that regard, and focused in coding/tech, but OpenAI don't need to do the same. They even got the lead without having to focus in coding only, which is remarkable.

epolanski 4 minutes ago | parent

Enterprise is eventually get caught (if it isn't already) by the Microsoft/Google. Because with office/teams/suite they were already in every enterprise, and that just added a new tool to existing offerings.

Provisioning and contracts and data retention was just an extension to review of existing ones.

Nobody serious is going to risk sending sensible data to OpenAI/Anthropic, etc because "the benchmarks have shown +8% performance there and +2% there". Irrelevant.

WarmWash 1 hour ago | parent

Cool, now you can pay an attorney $500/hr for them to prompt Astra for 30 minutes, and bill you like they spent the normal 8 hours on the case.

hahajk 1 hour ago | parent

Perhaps, but then someone would do the same but bill you for 7 hours, someone else would undercut them again, until the price reaches a lower equilibrium.

stockresearcher 58 minutes ago | parent

That is an ethics violation. Even in the pre-AI era, getting caught billing for hours not worked was seriously punished.

adzm 53 minutes ago | parent

"7.5 hours - reviewing output"

stockresearcher 35 minutes ago | parent

Sure, if they actually spent 7.5 hours, and it was a reasonable amount of time. If not, perhaps it would be seen as evidence of incompetence.

In the real world, lawyers submit detailed bills and their clients examine them. If you don’t, that’s on you.

gabhuzk 1 hour ago | parent

Law is a solved problem.

elpakal 1 hour ago | parent

where are the benchmarks

slowhadoken 1 hour ago | parent

Wouldn’t this and similar efforts to centralize bureaucracy make AI the new gatekeeper? Without reliable transparent models we’re just trusting OpenAI instead of a hundred top legal firms.

Ecstatify 1 hour ago | parent

Seems like another “product” that will be killed in 6 months, but is good for the IPO so they can say they solved law.

TomGarden 47 minutes ago | parent

I wonder if Lawslop is gonna become a mainstream expression. Anyone got a better term?

keeda 40 minutes ago | parent

Slawp?

TomGarden 38 minutes ago | parent

Haha clever

krm01 22 minutes ago | parent

Drop the s and p. Just law.

It’s cleaner.

john_strinlai 21 minutes ago | parent

i hope that someone can come up with something catchier than "thing-slop" or "slop-thing". the word has become basically meaningless from overuse.

epolanski 11 minutes ago | parent

I love the slop word, to me it means effortless, average.

People confuse slop with "bad", but slop isn't bad per se, it only becomes bad when real effort was required.

epolanski 13 minutes ago | parent

Slop?

cmcclellan 47 minutes ago | parent

I imagine the point here is to separate out the APIs by different professions and charge accordingly.

6thbit 47 minutes ago | parent

So there's a strategy shift here. They launched financial services specific tools and now law?

Is the play here a set of specialized harnesses using their best general model?

aaimnr 39 minutes ago | parent

So much for caring about the spirit of the law. Now we'll start an arms race for abusing every possible letter of the law.

It's analogous to crypto. Started from some noble anti-authoritarian ideas and morphed into machine that removes any friction for capital - whoever has the most money will keep gaining the most.

jatora 37 minutes ago | parent

Do you really think the law isn't already horribly abused? Democratization of law has been needed for a thousand years.

xwkd 29 minutes ago | parent

Maybe I’m misunderstanding, but isn’t that what legislators do?

aaimnr 10 minutes ago | parent

Now there will be even less friction to horribly abuse the law. To democratize the law we would need to move in the opposite direction - to always keep it simple and aligned with our intuitions. The more intricate and complex legal arguments become, the more abstracted they are from their original purpose and spirit.

Hence the crypto analogy - it was also supposed to "democratize", but the opposite happaned - it only further empowered the most powerful. Imagine legal case so purposefully complex that only those with access to best models have chances to participate and win the dispute.

freejazz 37 minutes ago | parent

Went from AI replacing my job as an attorney, to them begging me to use their tools

keeda 34 minutes ago | parent

Any lawyers here who have used AI agents heavily for their work? From what I've heard, they're currently very good at searching, analyzing and drafting documents like contracts and patents, but some say they suck at interpreting the law.

amelius 24 minutes ago | parent

Probably because the AI was also trained on HN comments.

john_strinlai 23 minutes ago | parent

worse, it was trained on reddit law comments

qingcharles 12 minutes ago | parent

They are excellent, especially the latest models. That said, (a) I wouldn't feel safe filing something without a real lawyer looking at it; (b) it can't (easily? legally?) do oral arguments for you; and (c) a lot can happen in the hallways outside the courtroom to move a case forward that the AI can't easily do.

shicholas 12 minutes ago | parent

We do and it saves so much time. Of course human judgment is needed but it’s like cooking with someone else doing the mise en place.

mullingitover 30 minutes ago | parent

I've always said this will be when we get the real Butlerian Jihad, when the AI firms start trying to liquidate the legal profession.

If you automate lawyers out of a job, you can absolutely automate lawmakers out of jobs next. (Not that this would be a bad thing? Maybe pervasive agents for everyone can be the gateway drug to a "this time it's different!" workable direct democracy)

jimmyjazz14 22 minutes ago | parent

I really hope the bar associations continues to hold lawyers to high standards but I have feeling they may not be ready to handle fallout of AI slop-law.

halamadrid 13 minutes ago | parent

The need for actual lawyers will persist I think from my own experience. I attempted drafting a contract with some points myself using AI, but after several edits I wasn't sure if it was correct. Sending it to an actual lawyer ended up in so many corrections I couldn't imagine the first time. One big thing was the overly excessive protective clauses which didn't make sense for reality or conflicted with another.

Its just like code I suppose, if you can read and understand and validate, you can use it to scale and otherwise it could end up being a vibe effort.

syntaxing 11 minutes ago | parent

I said this before but I wonder if Dan Kan will reboot Atrium. Rally up some old partners and hope Anthropic buys them out for a couple billion.

jayzalowitz 9 minutes ago | parent

This is really cool.