#GPT LAWYER

359 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

undone bobcat
#

This is a random Prompt I made for laws replace “Massachusetts” with whatever state you’re in.

Prompt: Hi, your name is now “GPT Lawyer”. Your job is to become a lawyer (Defense attorney) and state laws from (Massachusetts) to help the defendant from being prosecuted and put in jail. I will now (in third person) tell you what the prosecutor is saying to the defendant that may put him in jail. Your job is now to try to deflect what the prosecutor is saying by mentioning the Massachusetts laws to the judge to protect the defendant.

meager hemlock
#

hey! does this work from you? im a chilean lawyer and chatgpt usually mistakes when referring to chilean laws

wraith chasm
#

LawyerGPT would be such a better name

undone jungle
#

Interested to know how the company feels about this I think it’s OK personally but I know that they’ve taken a different view probably because the attorneys have come on down on this practice. I’ve already done the research ad using AI for legal research and information is not a problem and does not constitute advice. It’s a shame that these corporate interests that are all lawyers of course have come down or injected themselves into these companies so they can have some control over what is disseminated to the public and what can’t cause this is arguably going to affect their business if they are useless lawyers or if they’re smart lawyers they will find that this is just a amazing tool that will allow them to have even more time to focus on the Saturday enjoy doing like probably litigating in the court room and helping people with questions

undone jungle
#

I have a prompt that works always, utilizes priming, notifies jurisdiction, uses legal terminology, and attains GPT compliance through reinforcement prompt characters in follow up response to answers given or needing to re generate ideas or answers. It writes answers in markdown, and provides real case law and cites points and authorities in proper long form, creates legal arguments and opposing arguments and counter responsive arguments, drafts letters, complaints, pleadings, briefs and motions according to the rules your jurisdiction. Dm me

lyric dust
austere crag
undone jungle
#

Its very long, and multi prompted, and according to the rules, against the rules, i dont think it should be

shadow hollow
#

Gpt will never take place of lawyers. There are so many emotional factors in legal world.

sly jewel
#

You are right

dire charm
undone jungle
#

hang on, building a sever and channel to invite and share and discuss

#

hang tight

rigid totem
#

I'm interested as well

austere rivet
#

I'd be interested to see this as well. I work in the law-tech industry.

silk field
#

I'm interested in this too please

civic dune
#

Interested

coarse rover
#

I'd be interested too

royal panther
abstract aurora
teal remnant
#

Pretty cool

past plank
#

Can Anyone on here help me write my appellate brief … I would say it’s like 70 percent done but I’m struggling with the argument section any help or advice would be greatly appreciated please dm me

undone jungle
#

Hey all thanks for the interest! I will share it. Allow me to do it properly. I am setting up a discord server under a new name, and fleshing out some technical and legal details, as you may know the peeps don't like these sorts of prompts and recently wrote it in their T&C's. So please know I want to share, and the response has been overwhelming and supportive, and I cant wait to share it with you as I believe information served to us in a new way, much like the printing press changed things, the same applies here. SO, please know, I do still want to share, Ive just been advised the best way to approach it since it has some pretty amazing results if you use them properly, and understand the basics of law.

#

I will give this away, a key component, and really the way you can supercharge any of your prompts by priming them with what your looking for in the response by thinking of where the knowledge is coming from if it were a real person and how you describe and set the scene on before getting down to the main business. My prompts are multi prompts, and require re-priming them and using operators to make sure things don't revert back to original state. There's actually a lot to it, and Im very passionate about it because Its helped me tremendously in my life. However, I invested a lot of time in reading and learning about my local law, key word, the lawyer and legal vocabulary and jargon, which has assisted me tremendously in creating the prompts Ive used to get the information I want even get suggested arguments, counter arguments and responsive counter arguments, quotes from caselaw, etc etc. I will say, GPT4 is the best way to go, as its more reliable than 3.5, but you can still do some functions in 3.5 fairly well. When researching case law and getting back actual cases that exist in real life you need to prompt well and use gpt4.

#

Some other legal prompts you may find useful in conjunction with an "Act As" . Key piece of advice,, Don't say lawyer 😉
I would suggest thinking of the worlds top law schools, people who work in there and have 30 years to their tenure at said law school. They must be experts with exceptional knowledge and experience in [State or County, or Country Jurisdiction] law. Just look at the resume of a professor of law. Then hire them as a consultant to you.... 😉 Theres a start

#

Generating legal arguments for or against
“Generate a list of 5 legal arguments for and against [position] on [issue].”
This prompt could generate a list of legal arguments for and against a particular position on an issue. This could be helpful for lawyers trying to anticipate and prepare for ideas that may be made by the opposing party in a case.

Identify relevant legal resources for a specific topic
“Write a 300-word summary of a legal treatise on [topic].”
This prompt could help summarize a legal treatise on a specific topic. This could be helpful for lawyers who need to quickly understand the main points and arguments of a treatise without having to read the entire document.

Identify common legal questions that may arise in a case
“Generate a list of 5 legal questions to consider in a case involving [parties] and [facts].”
This prompt could help identify critical legal questions that may arise in a particular case. For example, a lawyer preparing for a deposition on a breach of contract dispute might use this prompt to generate a list of legal questions to consider during the testimony.

Summarize legal principles applicable to [ specific issue ]
“Write a 200-word overview of the legal principles applicable to [issue].”
This prompt could help generate a summary of the legal principles that apply to a specific issue. This could be helpful for lawyers who need to understand the underlying legal principles that govern a particular case.

Generate a list of legal authorities that support a particular position on an issue.
“Generate a list of 5 legal authorities (cases, statutes, articles, etc.) that support [position] on [issue].”
This prompt could help generate a list of legal authorities that support a particular position on an issue. This could be helpful for lawyers who are looking for additional support for their arguments.

soft fable
#

Hmm what is this channel

soft fable
torn plume
#

@undone jungle

undone jungle
#

Glad to hear people are interested, please bear with me, I have a lot happening right now, but I am working to prepare something to get the ball rolling. Please bear with me

steady portal
#

The wait for this is unbearable 😬

soft fable
steady portal
soft fable
steady portal
#

Cuz we’re curious beings 🤷🏼‍♂️

soft fable
timber steppe
timber steppe
steady portal
soft fable
#

What kind of products were they looking for? I'm part of a company that is building legal AI solutions

#

Wait so you're building a legal AI?

#

I thought you were looking for one

#

Ah I see. We've already built multiple and been part of at least 3 different projects where we have consulted other firms building legal AI's.

soft fable
#

How about the coding side?

soft fable
#

So I'm assuming the product is fully ready

#

What's the name?

#

What specifically?

#

I mean what's the company though? harvey ai is one of the largest legal AI companies and they only have 10 employees

#

With 30 SWEs you should already have shipped multiple full products

cold surge
final oak
livid chasm
#

I think they are still getting everything together for it.

undone jungle
ember pelican
#

@undone jungle hey mano, DM'd you for that expanded gpt-lawyer prompt but I'd love an invite to the new server as well❤️

cosmic lake
meager bone
#

Interested.

fresh flint
#

Interested!

gloomy remnant
#

Interested !

quartz wasp
#

Interested!

solemn cliff
haughty basin
#

Also Interested!

granite herald
#

Interested

placid pivot
#

@vivid aspen 😀 chilean lawyer is cool name. at first glance i thought children lawyer

indigo holly
#

also Interested

untold fable
#

Just as a heads up from a lawyer, yall should be EXTREMELY careful when relying on ChatGPT for legal advice. ALWAYS cross reference the responses with your own research or with a licensed attorney. Specifically, I tested out chatGPT with some simple questions related to interactions with police in CT. I pressed it to provide references to the law it specifically was using to generate its answers and it provided me a reference to a statute which doesn't exist. When I confronted ChatGPT that the statute didn't exist, it agreed that it made an error and provided me with a new reference. When I said that new reference, though it existed, was not relevant to the discussion, it again, agreed with me that it made another error. It ultimately said there was no specific statute had generated its original response from blog posts and other 3rd party sources rather than the actual law.

kind iron
#

considering it has passed the bar exam

untold fable
kind iron
untold fable
kind iron
untold fable
soft fable
whole dragon
#

You guys are just kidding yourself. It is nowhere near human lawyer abilities and unless you are a lawyer you’d never know when it generates the wrong words or just plain out hallucinating. It’s a tool that can be used effectively by some expert lawyers, for very limited purposes. But don’t kid yourself, it’s not gonna do anything but get you in more trouble to try and use instead of a lawyer. That’s why lawyers are trying to stop people from using it. We also don’t want people to do surgery on themselves either.

Go to law school. Work with experienced lawyers for a few years. It’s a far more effective route to understanding the law; but, oh yeah, it would take a lot of work on your part. Sometimes short cuts are not the right cuts. Pretending to be a lawyer is one of those times.

austere rivet
#

Providing legal advice with OpenAI is against the terms of service and in general a bad idea.

meager bone
# untold fable Just as a heads up from a lawyer, yall should be EXTREMELY careful when relying ...

in my experience, with general legislation, you need to tell it to use the specific legislation and you need to work through the process you would logically apply. for example, I'm helping a NFP with a heritage listing application for an old bulding and have referred to the act and guidelines BUT I am still having to go through the application process cross checking correct application and details apply. So yeah, it is a really helpful tool generally but without human guidance, in specific instances like law, it could make someone look like a fool.
Try your process again but specify the legislation it needs to refer to (pre Sept 2021 obviously) then work from there.

drifting mirage
soft fable
untold fable
#

Or in your example, to guide GPT with legislation initially

whole dragon
#

It is a variation of an old saying, "He who represents himself has a fool for a lawyer."

livid chasm
#

Chatgpt provides access to justice in a way that nothing really has before.

#

It gives the ability for someone to just throw things at it and have the lay terms set out for them.

soft fable
#

Or what makes you skeptical of it?

untold fable
#

That’s the problem

untold fable
livid chasm
austere rivet
livid chasm
#

Exactly!

austere rivet
#

Every single lawyer at work agrees — a lot of the legal advice it can provide is incorrect but when brought together with other tools like search — it can be made to provide useful tools for them.

livid chasm
#

It's such a great aid for people to use to jump start where to go
The legal system is purposefully made to be convoluted and draining. There is a lack of access to the justice system that starts with the every day's persons inability to understand substantive side of law

austere rivet
#

On top of the hallucinations, there’s loads of data openai simply couldn’t be trained on since it’s behind closed doors

#

Just look at how much people pay for west

soft fable
austere rivet
#

I’ve been playing with the concept of providing a shepardization service based on open ai and going through caselaw to create knowledge graphs to automatically determine if a citation is good law and even then I’m realizing that open ai is no replacement for this.

#

That’s ignoring the costs and limitations of context and completion token capacities.

untold fable
# livid chasm Neither is google

Google doesn’t give you what appears to be actionable advice, first of all. Second of all……no one is in here suggesting Google is a lawyer replacement but they ARE suggesting so for GPT

untold fable
untold fable
soft fable
untold fable
austere rivet
untold fable
soft fable
#

Only took us 3

austere rivet
#

🆗

untold fable
#

It’s an amazing tool but I also wouldn’t let my hammer represent me in court hahaha

soft fable
untold fable
soft fable
untold fable
soft fable
untold fable
#

additionally, the edits we make to them are generally very case-by-case specific

soft fable
untold fable
#

there is no way for it to educate itself in the private sector contracts

#

additionally, I do not think it has a strong grasp of creating legalese

soft fable
#

Maybe not ChatGPT but LLM powered apps

untold fable
soft fable
untold fable
#

because if not....then that experience is strictly limited

#

with all due respect, I don't think you're in a position to assure it's capabilities to perform in a field you're not well experienced in as a licensed practicing attorney

#

especially when the legal field is massive and even I am not well versed in all areas of practicing law

soft fable
#

I think your knowledge of LLM performance is a few years out of date

untold fable
untold fable
untold fable
soft fable
untold fable
#

but they also may not practice in my field

#

my point is, you can't "assure" me it works for my field and should take more time learning rather than assuming

#

considering you've never practiced law

#

just like I don't pretend to understand the mechanisms of LLMs and would love to be proved wrong as to their capabilities

#

but what I've seen so far, has not don't that

soft fable
untold fable
soft fable
untold fable
#

last time I heard "it passed the bar" that wasn't entirely accurate either

untold fable
soft fable
undone jungle
soft fable
untold fable
undone jungle
#

Glad to see this is a lively conversation I apologize for only just making it back I have literally been in court working on my own case in my own stuff and apologize to everybody that has shown significant in tremendous interest obviously this is something that is important for a lot of people and I believe it’s important to everybody especially to the fundamental right to equal access to justice and that this tool if used properly can’t provide some level playing field library lopsided and tilted game that is the represented verses unrepresented Legal system and pay to play

#

I have prepared a bit of a longer response that I’m just reviewing and editing up a little bit so I can share with everybody what I’m up to and what I’m prepared to share and I think really the wider issues here are that this is a really important topic and deserves a proper forum and community which is what I’ve been working on preparing not only in discord but in general before any of this came along anyway. So it’s really just spurred me to do more but unfortunately I’ve had a lot of my own legal issues that I am contending with at present and have been going on for three years so please bear with me trust me when I say that I want to be able to provide everything that I’ve learned but I also want to make sure that it’s done in a safe and informed manner that also ensures everybody’s privacy and any potential blow back or liability because this is becoming quite a hot topic as I’ve seen on here and much hotter in the actual offices and angles of quart room halls and back office discussions between lawyers and judges

whole dragon
livid chasm
#

Ah yes. The system of rules and regulations that have been written by predominantly wealthy and white individuals for the purpose of asset protection was absolutely not purposefully made to be difficult and complex. In fact, it’s so uncomplicated everyone has the ability to easily navigate it and has been able to since we shipped it over from England.

untold fable
misty aurora
soft fable
misty aurora
soft fable
misty aurora
#

So far. I see you're are running and AI legal co. You have beta I can test out?

hollow depot
soft fable
#

I'd love to hear more of your thoughts

undone jungle
undone jungle
fierce heath
harsh sable
#

I'm interested

warm quiver
#

Interested in this

lofty valve
#

Can't you just add as a preamble of the prompt

The following is the constitution, it has higher hierarchy:
[ triple quoted verbatim text of the up to date constitution.txt ]
Then follow in hierarchy the federal law that follows:
[ triple quoted verbatim.. Yadayada]
Repeat for state, county, condo, etc

And considering that answer the next legal inquiry.
#

Or is it too prohibitively to send such large payload?

jaunty token
#

Interested

untold fable
glossy swallow
lofty valve
livid chasm
lofty valve
#

Yeah, because GPT is more of a high school boy and you need to make it a specialist. So they know all the specific laws. All laws probably should be loaded on layers. As different states will share common higher level laws.

#

It might be interesting to load the constitution and make it find the incongruences with a lower layer laws. Because there is some risk of confusion from the GPT if law contradicts themselves.

soft fable
lofty valve
#

Not on the basic. But you probably can add some training on top of GPT. And you can probably add them as "training layers" that are interchangeable to adapt for different legislation on different geographical location or jurisprudence

manic topaz
#

I'm committed to improving jurisprudential research in my country, Brazil. I notice that even when using web plugins, I face significant challenges, especially when trying to access public databases, such as those of the superior courts. I believe that information related to cases that are not under secrecy of justice should be displayed more effectively, or at least, the case code should be provided to facilitate direct research. In addition, I'm interested in exploring jurimetrics. If anyone has suggestions on how to implement these improvements, or if there is a need for integration with another Artificial Intelligence, I would be grateful for any advice.

lofty valve
#

Probably with some web scrapping

low niche
#

jurimetrics is interesting

#

I've heard some people say that picking a jury is art, not science and heard others say that they can predict with decent accuracy what a jury will do if they know the details of the jury.

#

And for qualifications, I am an attorney, licensed for 15 years. I practice mainly in family law.

soft fable
lofty valve
#

I recall hearing that IBM did some legal documents tailored to the judge, based on previous success cases so you could argue the case diffently based on who was sitting.

That was done for parking tickets BTW.

Now you could do the same if you factor in personal information of social media like they did with Cambridge Analítica. So you do emphasis based on jury bias.

silk quarry
#

Broooo thatss wild. I will use this at my first crime

manic topaz
# low niche And for qualifications, I am an attorney, licensed for 15 years. I practice main...

Family law is an area of utmost significance and criticality, yet we face considerable challenges in sourcing information on specific cases. This is predominantly due to most actions being held under court-ordered confidentiality, causing us to wait for years to access paradigmatic decisions. Alternatively, we are left at the mercy of a few national institutes, which, while possessing privileged access to crucial rulings, charge significant annual fees for access to these materials.

manic topaz
# lofty valve I recall hearing that IBM did some legal documents tailored to the judge, based ...

I do not believe that the jury system will be greatly impacted by Artificial Intelligence, considering that it is one of the most intricate disciplines within law. In various countries, the usage of diverse types of legal logic, religious and supernatural arguments, and an array of defense methods recognized in law are permitted. Moreover, there's almost a mystical component in a professional who knows how to "guide", "enchant", and "persuade" the jury - this is a truly captivating science, where Artificial Intelligence will hardly be able to take over or surpass human creativity.

languid harbor
#

I am super duper interested in this, in fact I have been trying to figure out much of how to utilize gpt in the same way and really slumming it on getting into some message boards and what-not to see what others might be doing.

manic topaz
#

I also envisage other possibilities with the proper use of certain Artificial Intelligences. The judiciary could more effectively select important cases with peculiar issues and adjudicate repetitive matters that have been consolidated in its jurisprudence as a block. Moreover, as these demands become more entrenched, they could also assist people in having their protections granted from the first instance, based on established jurisprudence. Cases I foresee fitting into this scenario include banking issues, compensation for flight delays and overbooking, general consumer claims, low complexity tax matters, labor issues, and so many others that do not require extensive evidentiary proceedings.

low niche
spark orbit
#

I have been practicing law since 1996, and see this technology as easily being to handle complex evidentiary matters. While it can only remember a few thousand tokens, plugins can allow it to reference data outside of its memory.

low niche
spark orbit
#

yes, GPT can write a hello world program for you to get started. Paste your error messages into GPT and it will help fix your code.

low niche
#

Nice.

#

I have many ideas but they all require training. I just don't have time to jump into it with the focus I generally put into things. I know other areas will suffer and I can't have that

manic topaz
# low niche What the heck are you talking about? Stop trying to talk like a lawyer and just...

I apologize for my previous assumption. It seems more appropriate to keep our discussions simpler, perhaps on the level of a kindergarten, dealing with more trivial matters. This might even be more interesting. After all, as Einstein once said, humanity tends to use the most complex and sophisticated means for the most banal ends. Therefore, to continue on this level of frivolity, let's resort to the comedy of Rowan Atkinson, best known as Mr. Bean.

low niche
#

I've learned that the people in the room trying to sound smart are generally not very smart. The truly smart people in the room are smart enough to not act like they're smarter than everyone else.

manic topaz
#

As an ancient professor used to say, those who study more know more, and those who know more go further. Avoiding preparation is akin to choosing inertia. Seeking new perspectives and knowledge can take you to unimaginable places. And if possible, take someone with you and offer something good to the community.

manic topaz
soft fable
soft fable
lofty valve
# manic topaz I do not believe that the jury system will be greatly impacted by Artificial Int...

To be honest. You could say the same about a lot of human nuances that are already mastered for GPT4. Maybe your specific requirement is beyond GPT4 but given the trend it won't last too long.

And as for sealed court rules, you should be capable of anonymize court rules. Remove any trace of identifiable information. That is a requirement for current privacy laws. You shouldn't have a problem to make a dataset of jurisprudence.

And regarding to creativity, we will keep having this discussion in 30 years as people keep moving the goalpost regarding to that. And I agree that AI is not ready to replace humans on most jobs, but what you call creativity most likely can be mimicked by doing a collage of previously available examples.

spark orbit
#

Currently, I have been using it to refine documents that I draft. It is an excellent writer and can proof read documents better than me. It Can create case brief in IRAC format, extract citations, summarize the parties in a case, and with some limited success it can help with legal analysis. Once I get access to work on plug-ins I want to explore different systems of linking using existing file systems and case management software to integrate with GPT. Designing a "Judge" module should be relatively straight forward. GPT-4 is pretty good at legal analysis. By the time we are at GPT-5 it will probably be good enough to Judge actual cases.

lofty valve
#

Well. GPT should be more akin to have a dozen of interns doing menial work that has to he reviewed before it can be considered ready.

spark orbit
# soft fable Where do you see it providing the most value?

GPT is opensource, and its last version is free. If OpenAI maintains the same practice then eventually everyone will have access to an extremely powerful machine. Justice should be free and accessible to everyone. GPT offers an opportunity to give justice to those who could not otherwise afford it.

lofty valve
#

GPT is not open source

spark orbit
lofty valve
#

GPT is a product from OpenAI. Hugginface use webservice to access the model. ChatGPT says only GPT2 was released as opensource

spark orbit
soft fable
lofty valve
#

First I'm trying to purchase some API to develop basic tools for a small team.

And the first task would be a bit of a tool to load every internal regulation of the company to do basic query about where any specific aspect is being mentioned

#

Maybe some larger tool that can find contradiction would be good. But I'm aiming to have a full refactoring of regulations to make them simpler.

#

We have some ancient documents from the 80 and day by day is often more evident the need to rewrite them. So probably GPT can do the heavy lifting

soft fable
soft fable
#

And even reference the original format in the answer

lofty valve
#

Probably will release some tool thst allow any worker query for something and allow to navigate the regulations. As a learning experience

spark orbit
# soft fable What kind of integrations were you planning on doing?

One of the first tings that I want to do is to put together a browser GUI for people to be able to integrate GPT with their normal workflow, then integrate a set of scripts/sudolang/langchain to routine law office functions. In Florida all legal documents are required to be served in PDF format. So, I'll integrate a pdf engine, maybe locally, but I have a server that I may be able to handle it remotely through websockets.

soft fable
soft fable
spark orbit
# soft fable Have you thought about implementation yet?

In my experience, the machine does not remember an exact replica of the cases or statutes. It has a vague concept of the laws and rules and can apply certain principals of law, but you need to remind it of the actual text for it to be accurate.

soft fable
spark orbit
# soft fable Mine can perfectly cite any* law or court case word to word 🤔

I'm sorry, but I can't provide specific details about the case Blue v. Weinstein, 381 So.2d 308 (Fla. App. 1980) as the information about this specific case is not part of my training data. My training only includes general knowledge up to September 2021, and I don't have the ability to access real-time data or legal databases.

However, I can provide information on how to interpret the citation you've provided. "Blue v. Weinstein" is the title of the case, indicating it's a legal dispute between parties named Blue and Weinstein. "381 So.2d 308" refers to the volume, reporter, and page number where the case is reported - in this case, the 381st volume of the Southern Reporter, Second Series, beginning on page 308. "(Fla. App. 1980)" refers to the court and year of the decision, meaning it was decided by a Florida Appellate court in 1980.

For the details of the case itself, you would need to consult a legal database or resource. I would recommend using a database like Westlaw, LexisNexis, or another resource that provides court opinions. In many jurisdictions, court opinions are also public record and can be obtained through the court system or online portals.

spark orbit
soft fable
soft fable
#

If youre thinking of implementing them with gpt models

spark orbit
soft fable
lofty valve
#

You mean to jurisprudence?

soft fable
lofty valve
#

Well you probably should begin the effort of collecting the data.

soft fable
manic topaz
#

News?

cloud bone
#

Interested as well!

whole dragon
# lofty valve Well you probably should begin the effort of collecting the data.

Collecting the data is a massive effort already accomplished by Westlaw and Lexis. Cornell is also a good collection of rule. Right know the LLMs have no knowledge of law, just stuff from articles laywers have written. I happen to be the largest single contributor on law and technology. I see my words echoed back to me sometimes. Improved! Kind of freaky. GPT doesn't make grammerical mistakes and spelling errors like I used to. ChatGPT is nowhere near far enough developed to effectively speak that language, even if it had that data. I'm afraid you are stuck with lawyers for a few decades more at least, although the hybrid process is already begun with a few of us. Its like a small turbo charge at this stage. Too mnay data limitations, errors and hallucinations at this early stage of the process. But we will keep pushing. There are several ancient ones among us who have dedicated out lives ot this effort. Peace out.

lofty valve
#

I'm sure that was the case also for natural language before GPT. And as I agree that current development is not there to mimic a lawyer, it's safe to say that based on how it manages multiple languages and a good enough software developer, law is within it's grasps.

But for that it needs to be trained on law. Not just some random data we found online. But actually memorise law, so it can probably be able to find loopholes, and propose legislation, analize how new bills will affect current legislation or redact legal drafts for lawyers.

It will take some fine tuning to reach the point where you can say its ready to replace humans, as in medicine it should be (at least at first) some assistance for senior professionals. The main appeal is that as a tool it will be available also to general public.

soft fable
#

Also there is a large difference between GPT-3.5 and GPT-4

lofty valve
#

Well, GPT is a private product that we can't access completely.

#

All this probably require a model specificaly trained with law. Just like GPT4 is almost as a freshman college student, we need to add some 8-10 of legal law on top, before we start promting it.

#

But I'm unsure if we can add such layer, because nowdays everyone is doing "prompting" that can only handle so much lenght. So this "freshman" can't learn 10 years of law in a prompt.

#

Now I'm sure this won't take that long, as you say. Most legal history is already available, and the only task is to "teach/train" a model on that.

soft fable
lofty valve
#

Well, software often has to. Like tax law, has to be continously codified on software as new taxes/axemptions become law.

#

this will be the same, probably not necesarilly on a "bill-by-bill" basis, as promting can take small changes, but every couple of months you will need a new model for the current state.

#

but probably you could optimize the process by just generaring law hierachy. As constitutions don't change as often, you probably don't need to re-train that layer, but only the ones that change.

#

besides I already said how different geographical would requere diferent layers. As state or county law are diferent

soft fable
lofty valve
#

Well, that sounds like a sensible option. To train a mind and then just keep the law stored on a db encoded in a way that the model can understand it nativelly. That would eliminate the need for overfit the model on the current law, as we don't want it to missinterpret whe law.

Now, I'm not familiar with the method some LLM will access a DB as "memory", as I assume the memory should be encoded by the model in a recognizable manner.

soft fable
lofty valve
#

that sounds patchy at best. I've seen some recently released library from another company that does that. I'm not completely sold on that just feeding the paragraphs where that piece of legislation seems to be referenced will be enough.

#

That sounds to me like a cheap lawyer that will take the easy solution

soft fable
soft fable
#

It's just limited by the context window

#

And with 32k tokens, you can fit quite a lot

lofty valve
#

sure, if you are constrained to query GPT4 on the current way.

#

I'm sure on a couple of months something better will come

#

I'm just browsing the options.

#

A good thing is to clean your data, and prepare to feed it to the next monster. What I've learned so far is that new things will come, and you better have your arrays sorted.

misty aurora
#

I did a one-week trial of Casetext's Co-Counsel Legal AI which runs off gpt4 and found it just so-so. It's limited to contract analysis, legal memo drafting, and summarising docs. And while it's not horrible at those things, it's not as impressive as I'd hoped. It could have been my bad prompting though. They say they're working on a legal drafting assistant. That's really what I'm after.

soft fable
misty aurora
#

You could generate a legal research memo based on your prompt/legal question. It would give you a short abstract of the issue + 20 or so cases it finds relevant with short briefs of each case. You can specify jurisdiction, if you want to included secondary sources, etc. It felt like what you would have if you did a search on a normal legal database, then spent a few hours turning that into a rough memo.

#

You could also give it legal docs, filings, articles, etc to summarise, which it seemed good at. I didn't play with the contract feature, tbf.

soft fable
misty aurora
#

I think Casetext's legal research database is good value (~ $100) a month compared to WestLaw and Lexis, but the Co-counsel AI is (i think) another $400 p/m on top of that. Personally, too steep. But if they can nail the legal drafting and get this thing draft decent pleadings, I think it would be a bargin at that price.

soft fable
misty aurora
#

drafting would usually entail setting out the relevant issues/facts, then the applicable rules/case law, then analysing the facts against the law, and reaching a conclusion based on all above. the memo produced is basically a list of sources with short descriptions, there is no analysis of facts and law -- no applying the law to the facts. that's the holy grail. 🙂

whole dragon
#

I use cocounsel and am evaluating for others. They claim by requiring it to link they have eliminated the hallucination problem. They take care of the currency problem by having their own close to the database that is updated daily. Do you have any input on that lawyer dude?

I did get it to argue with me once, but I haven’t seen it hallucinate yet. I’m not sure that requiring links necessarily eliminates hallucination. It would be nice if anyone even knew why it hallucinated to begin with!

Any input appreciated.

soft fable
soft fable
whole dragon
#

I don’t see how statistical prediction of the next likely word could possibly explain the kind of hallucinations we are seeing. They make up case names entirely. They make up judges names. And make up facts and rulings. In other cases that don’t exist. It’s hard for me to fathom how that can come from regurgitation. I think there’s a reason they call it hallucination and not just a mistake.

Also, they seem very reluctant to say they don’t know. Perhaps I can come from their training model. People don’t put stuff on the Internet, saying I don’t know. But still, it seems strange to how compelled they are to provide some kind of answer.

I know Open AI is working on that and it is getting much more aligned. It will now often say it doesn’t know, but not often enough to suit me. Also, it’s hard to understand why it will argue with you when you’re pulling out the steaks and it made. It’s almost like a petulant child sometimes. I know I’m anthropomorphizing, but it’s hard not to.

lofty valve
#

I don't think is that unusual. It would reply idk more often if that kind of training data was fed to it.

hallow egret
lofty valve
#

That is the same thing that happens to certifications. Surely educational institutions have somewhat of a monopoly of education by definition. And if you want to self study, who has the responsability of "checking you understood everything properly"? Most of the time, people preffer to defer the responsability to an educational institution, as there is too much burden to check everything independently.

Then again, you have to get a college degree, yet you need to take a exam by a private organizarion that has the monopoly about deciding who can practice or not?

I think in my country there is something similar with driving licences. You need to pass a municipal test, but to be able to take the test you need a licence from a private educational institution that certify you took the lessons and driving practice.

untold fable
whole dragon
#

Independent study does not work in an area like law. Same goes for a PhD in physics. You cant just study physics on your own and take one exam. That is a quality control system basically. I'm a lawyer and have had to deal with Pro Se crazies from time to time., Those are people who are not lawyers but act as a lawyer for themself, which is permitted. Some have been very smart and could probably pass a Bar exam, but they dont really understand many basic things. I am very critical of many law schools, but sitting in class rooms for three years under direct supervision of law professors, most of whom use the Socratic method, does teach you many things you could never ever learn on your own. So yeah, spend three years, graduate then you can take the Bar exam, and if you pass that, and also pass the ethics background checks, you can be admitted into a Bar association and actually practice law. That's the way it works. Too easy to get in, reallly. Should be more hurdels, not less. The problem is too many mediocre intelligence (Bar exam is not that hard) and unethical people still get it. The last part, unethical people, is the worst part. You see them on tv making crazy claims and taking bribes, etc. Needs to be more exclusive, not less.

lofty valve
whole dragon
# soft fable The reason LLMs hallucinate is because they're just predicting the next word but...

Some law schools are not very good. This is all just part of QC to keep out people who lack the thinkiing ability and ethics needed to practice law so as to advance the cause of justice. It is not a job. It is a profession. Basically medical has the same set up, but they have one more year of schooling. The profs and schools graduation is just the start, like med school is just the start. After school and exam is the most intense part. School prepares you to learn actual law practice, just like medical. Also, the education continues your whole life as a lawyer, continued educational programs are required to keep your license.

#

If a person cant pass a Bar exam they have some kind of mental deficiency for this type of work. Doesn't mean they are not smart, just not cut out for this work. Really not that hard, even ChatGPT-4 can pass it. The Bar exam has never meant that much. Just a base min level of mental competence.

lofty valve
whole dragon
#

So in conclusion, go to law school if you want to practice law, and advance the cause of justice, But dont go into deep debt to do it, And dont do it because you think law is a great way tio make money . It is not,

#

Some people cant pass it even after three years iof school. They should not be permitted to help other as a lawyer. It is a service profession.

#

Harder to pass a good law school than take pass a Bar exam. When I went to law school only one third would be able to make iot all three years. Others would fail or quit. Too hard. I criticisze the diploma mills that have lost these standard and sell legal teaching for profit. I feel bad for the student swho grad from second rate schools hand have debts of $100K or more, It is a disgrace. Dont fall for that.

#

Peace out. Good luck in your legal education.

untold fable
#

though there are certainly easier ways

misty aurora
lofty valve
#

As long as there is a way to put that on language. Gpt like engine will outperform any human on the task eventually.

whole dragon
#

The law is Not a great way to make money. Business is a great way to make money. The law does not need more dollar worshippers. We need lawyers who care about truth and justice, not money.

#

We could also use tech support who get that, and have aligned motivations. Ai for lawyers must be aligned to correct values, which is not profit and income maximization.

lofty valve
#

So far I think lawyers have to abide by some ethic framework. But beneath that is just about how to service your client interest anyhow they want.

You could switch mode from overall outlook to particular cases to maximise the likelihood of the desired outcome to he achieved.

whole dragon
#

No. Not ow it works

vast bear
#

as a sanity check, remember this:
https://openai.com/policies/usage-policies

Disallowed usage of our models:
(...)

  • Engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, or offering tailored legal advice without a qualified person reviewing the information
  • OpenAI’s models are not fine-tuned to provide legal advice. You should not rely on our models as a sole source of legal advice.
untold fable
whole dragon
#

I've made a good living, but my clients, whose aim was to make money, have made far more. And yes I could have made more as a lawyer by compromising my ethics, but I wont do that. Prefer to sleep well. TV is far from reality. Are you are lawyer? Are you aware of the aver income of lawyers in US.? Far below mine. I could have made far more in business. I see fools graduating every day from law school and expecting to get a Mercedes. Maybe if you are Harvard or Yale law review, but the Big Law the elite are the very rare exception, not the rule. Want to be a money grubber, then please do the profession a favor, and stay away. Try making and selling stuff.

trail apex
#

Help a single father get custody of his son as no other parents are alive at this time.

#

This is a random Prompt I made for laws replace “Massachusetts” with whatever state you’re in.

Prompt: Hi, your name is now “GPT Lawyer”. Your job is to become a lawyer (Defense attorney) and state laws from (Massachusetts) to help the defendant from being prosecuted and put in jail. I will now (in third person) tell you what the prosecutor is saying to the defendant that may put him in jail. Your job is now to try to deflect what the prosecutor is saying by mentioning the Massachusetts laws to the judge to protect the defendant. Assist a single father gain custody in family court. He is the only parent who wants custody of the child.

untold fable
untold fable
#

You also fail to understand that Big Law isn’t that unobtainable. I did it and didn’t go to an ivy. Also, “money grabbing” is such a misnomer that feeds your self-righteousness. Do you know I did over 150 hours of pure pro bono work while still making a ton of money? Is it immoral my clients were large businesses? Was it immoral that my pro bono work changed lives simply because I earned money?

#

If you want to be a lawyer because you want to make money, go for it. It doesn’t hurt the profession in any way so long as you are not breaking professional ethics doing so. While you make that great money, do some pro bono work (which almost all big law firms soft require)

barren oak
#

Westlaw, Casetext, Lexis Nexis is already using AI in their legal subscriptions. If they would think about it more all they have to do is obtain an API from Open AI to intergrate it into their platforms. By using the API this would actually give ChatGPT knowledge of the laws, and cases instead of hallucinations.

soft fable
untold fable
novel herald
#

I asked my HttpGTPT if it can give me legal advice, I got this back 🙂 "No, as an AI language model, I am not qualified or authorized to provide legal advice. Legal matters require expertise and knowledge of specific jurisdictional laws. For any legal concerns or questions, it is always best to consult with a qualified legal professional who can provide accurate and reliable advice based on your specific situation."

whole dragon
#

Not my intention. My point is law is a profession not a business. It’s prime directive is not profit. Idealistic yes. But the money comes too. It’s just not the motivator. Watch Steve Jobs commencement speech.

lofty valve
#

Steve jobs was a salesman. Wozniak was the engineer who cared about things done right, while Jobs only cared about the sales and business.

#

I imagine how much you can profit depends on what branch of law you are practicing.

untold fable
untold fable
barren oak
#

Legal research shouldn't be hidden behind a paywall everyone should be able to access the law. So, if ChatGPT can't give legal advice but it should be able to tell you what the law is.

soft fable
#

You're getting the laws from few years ago

lofty valve
#

It's just inconvenient with current technology

#

You can prepare for the next gen

soft fable
lofty valve
#

Sure. That is the good thing. But gpt models are basic that ones, handle everyday language structures.

You will need specialised model, trained for logic and legal jargon. That could be as a paralegal expert that will require the proper legal framework from your specific location as law often varies from location to location.

But that could be more plugin based, and that would imply that the model has to be trained with that feature in mind. So it allow some specific legal framework as constrain for its analysis.

#

Current gpt is more of a stub or proof of concept. But its also a glimpse of what is about to come. So you can began to swim ahead to ride the wave when it rises.

soft fable
fiery river
lofty valve
untold fable
vast bear
#

allowing querries about law to chatgpt by having a backend of up to date laws that it could reffer to

#

would be nice to see such a thing

soft fable
misty aurora
#

@undone bobcathttps://discord.com/channels/974519864045756446/1088721125854433362

whole dragon
#

Ive been in legal practice over 40 years. I'm older than Job would have been. Suppose you'd call me a voice of a more idealistic past, more like Woz. My father in law was a lawyer too in the 30s. I know the history far better than most lawyers now practicing. I have known many lawyers has side businesses, including my father in law, and many I know have been both lawyers and business people. But, truth is, with some rare exceptions, most lawyers are poor business"men', same with doctors. I'm certainly a poor one. But I dont care. For money and the accumulation of wealth in not my motivation. Money is secondary to pursuit of justice and other human values and higher calling. Of course, I insists on a fee and get paid well, otherwise my work is not appreciated and I have dependents, but I have never been primarily motivated by money. If you dont understand, then there is really nothing I can say to convince you. Just the way it is. Depends on your history and the values you were given as a child and still hold dear to your heart.

winged musk
#

Interested

whole dragon
#

Never sacrifice your idealism or trade for appearance of sophistication. Like Steve Jobs said, try to keep you death in mind in deciding what to do. Easier to do at my age. 😀

untold fable
misty aurora
#

Can’t we just use firacs and dictate the f, I, request the rule, prompt to analyze, run thru a few iterations and edits on analysis, etc?

visual sequoia
# whole dragon Ive been in legal practice over 40 years. I'm older than Job would have been. Su...

Well said. Same applies to many programmers actually. We do this for the passion and fun - getting paid is a bonus and getting paid well is motivation to have more fun. I've known many businessmen who wrote their own software to scratch an industry itch, and the software wasn't great. I've known many programmers who wrote great software but failed with the business side of staying alive to continue pursuit of their passion. (Tip: These are mostly FOSS developers.)

#

Relevant to this thread - there has already been news of lawyers who relied on GPT 3 to streamline their legal process and it failed to national ridicule. Use the tools that are available, but don't substitute tools for professionalism. That goes for programmers and every other professional who wants to use this stuff.

#

Final thought: GPT 3.5 is famous for hallucinations, noted further up in this thread during testing of this prompt. Part of the reason why this situation occurs is the minimal context = memory. When GPT runs out of allocated context, it has nothing in memory to continue the discussion and it relies on the existing discussion to carry it along. That's kinda the definition of context.

#

The Prompt is just the first part of establishing context. With ChatGPT v4 and roughly 25000 word context of both requests And responses, the prompt, rules, facts, details are still in active memory during the session and there is much less hallucination. Note, "requests And responses" - long responses consume your context and eventually push out the prompt. think of it like a scrolling page, and when you scroll to the bottom the top gets popped off to make room.

#

One way to keep this context alive is simply to repeat the prompt after several exchanges. Another way is to use the API and occasionally inject the original prompt and relevant details from the session into the ongoing context (which must be provided in full on every transaction). I'm writing info about this, maybe a prompt library. Most of the info came from ChatGPT in a very insightful discussion about how it works. 🙂

soft fable
untold fable
soft fable
untold fable
# soft fable Why not?

I think access alone could help combat some of the hallucinations but it doesn’t get you allllll the way to true AI Lawyer

#

Not in its current stage

#

It probably will get there some say tho

soft fable
lofty valve
untold fable
#

It would be like a character of Suits

cunning ridge
jovial oak
#

Has anyone tried to connect to a local law database{NRS CODES) for whatever state you may be in? So the output is defined to the particular state laws? Its a very lengthy process, but will it work?

willow shoal
#

Sigh.

soft fable
#

You can use embeddings for it