I can’t tell if the first sentence is sarcasm or not.

This document reads like a trade group lobbying the government, not like the government looking out for the interests of its people.

With regards to LLM content in the legal system, law firms can use LLMs in the same way an experienced attorney uses a junior attorney to write a first pass. The problem lies when the first pass is sent directly to court without any review (either for sound legal theory or citation of cases which either don’t exist or support something other than the claim).

▲

tzs 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> With regards to LLM content in the legal system, law firms can use LLMs in the same way an experienced attorney uses a junior attorney to write a first pass

Junior attorneys would not produce a first pass that cites and quotes nonexistent cases or cite real cases that don’t match what it quotes.

The experienced attorney is going to have to do way more work to use that first draft from an LLM then they would to use a first draft from an actual human junior attorney.

▲

thephyber 11 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Neither should the LLM.

Using the legal equivalent of Deep Research is what law firms should be using, not the cheapest model a available with no model guardrails.

▲

jdross 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

They’re going to use junior attorneys to do that work. It’s the juniors who will be expected to produce more

▲

pyman 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

What's funny about this report is that it doesn't mention the challenges China, the biggest manufacturing power in the world, faced while automating factories with AI and robots.

Considering how advanced China is, maybe it's time we stop talking about the "AI race" and start talking about the "unemployment race." The US government should be asking: how is China tackling unemployment in the age of automation and AI? What are they doing to protect people from losing their jobs?

From what I've seen, they're offering state benefits, reinforcing unemployment insurance, expanding technical education, and investing in new industries to create jobs.

So what's the US doing apart from writing PDFs? It's up to them to decide what the next chapter is going to be. One thing is for sure, China is already writing theirs.

Social discomfort can lead to long-term instability if nothing is done about it. When people are pushed out of the system, it can trigger protests, strikes, and divisions within society. This is going to be America's (North and South) biggest challenge.

	▲	thephyber 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> So what's the US doing apart from writing PDFs? If you take their words for it, a large percentage of Trump voters cite employment competition for their complaints with immigration and complain about NAFTA and corporate offshoring of jobs as their rationale for breaking many US institutions + scrambling the Democratic and Republican parties.

▲

thephyber 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

As I heard it, the senior attorney guides the strategy and does proof reading. The junior does the tactics.

▲

thimabi 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> I can’t tell if the first sentence is sarcasm or not.

Yep, it was.

I wholly agree that the document feels less guided by the public interest rather than by various business interests. Yet that last goal is in a kind of weird spot. It feels like something that was appended to the plan and not really related to the other goals — if anything, contrary to them.

That becomes clear when we read the PDF with the details of the Action Plan. There, we learn that to “Combat Synthetic Media in the Legal System” means to fight deepfakes and fake evidence. How exactly that’s going to be done while simultaneously pushing AI everywhere is unclear.

▲

ygritte 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> not like the government looking out for the interests of its people.

There's an idea. This government is just a propaganda machine for its head honcho.

▲

tiahura 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

The complainers are missing the panda in the room. This was inevitable as a matter of national security.

	▲	thephyber 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		If that were a concern, the same people who wrote this document could have opted to keep high performance GPU hardware out of China. Instead, they opted to deregulate Nvidia’s ability to sell to that country, thereby increasing their ability to compete in the AI race. China is struggling with general economy issues (young degree holder unemployment, unrolling the real estate crisis, the demographic time bomb from the One Child policy). But they are much better posed to solve their energy constraint problems than the US is. Our grid will take MUCH more work to upgrade to support sufficient numbers of AI data centers.