Login | April 13, 2024

ChatGPT not practicing law any time soon

RICHARD WEINER
Technology for Lawyers

Published: February 10, 2023

Over the course of about two weeks at the beginning of the year, a generative AI-powered answer-bot has taken the imagination of an unimaginative tech press by storm. In fact, since I conceived of and started this story, ChatGPT seems like the only tech story the press can write about.
ChatGPT seems like the lazy writer’s panacea, the Google of creative writing.
Ask it questions, it gives you answers. Not like Google, which only gives you links.
Generative AI generates a text answer which, depending on the question and intent of the questioner, could be anything from a recipe to the answers to an MBA exam. Or the bar exam.
ChatGPT was created by the company by OpenAI and if you haven’t tried it yet you should.
Go here and check it out. It’s free, for now (there will be a paid version).
GPT stands for Generative Pre-Trained Transformer, and ChatGPT (technically GPT-3) is the third generation of this natural language processing tool that allows a user to have a seemingly human-like conversation with it.
ChatGPT is attached to and can refer to an enormous database of human knowledge—with all the strengths, weaknesses and possible horribleness that implies.
One of the several ideas floating about regarding the potential uses of GPT-3 is in the legal profession and others in writing professionally and academically.
So I did a brief experiment with ChatGPT in those spheres and this article is about what I found in the app and out in the world.
I asked it questions and it gave me answers. (The original questions and answers are attached to this story online).
First of all, I was looking for something very specific: Could this bot replace me as a writer of legal technology columns (which I have been dutifully pumping out weekly for two decades)?
So I gave it a try and my input prompt was “write a 350 word column on ChatGPT for lawyers.”
I was, as you can imagine, looking to see if this app could replace me.
Well what I got was less than 350 words and is written, not for lawyers, but for maybe an 8th-grade English assignment. It’s a low-level sales pitch and is style-free, colorless and misleading all at the same time.
It made me remember when I wrote for the Plain Dealer for a few years. It was an enjoyable experience, except for constantly being told to write for an 8th-grade level reading audience.
This is the level of reading (and writing) that Chat GPT spits out.
So it’s no wonder people think it writes so well. Because most people, including journalists, read and write on an 8th-grade level. You know it’s true. Plus most lawyers don’t write very well anyway.
This little 344-word essay is misleading as well—or at least, it allows other people to mislead about its legal capabilities.
For instance, at least one legal blogger has stated that ChatGPI can “do legal research.”
But the little column it generated for me states that the app can be trained with a large data set to do legal research. Big difference.
That large data set would, of course, be all of the data in Westlaw or LexisNexis, etc.
Of course all that is behind paywalls. That’s why it couldn’t answer my questions.
So for ChatGPT to be able to do legal research, you have to do all the data inputting yourself. Every case ever decided.
In other words, it isn’t capable of actual legal research on any level.
Which I discovered next by asking it about any cases that modified Brown v. Board of Education.
The result is not sufficient for actual legal research. No citations, no links. Again, probably OK for an 8th grade research paper, but not for lawyers.
Then I asked it for the text of Brown. Nope. “Too long.”
So then I just broke down and asked it directly if it could do legal research. The answer: No.
No legal research. No legal writing. No real journalism. Lots of sales language.
I then asked it directly for legal advice. It gave some. And then it gave a disclaimer basically obviating the advice (probably a good thing).
The next legal question I asked also generated some kind of general answer, then said to see an attorney (also good advice but why bother with asking it in the first place?).
Then I asked it to basically prove to me its assertion in my earlier query that it could write a contract.
Again it spit out a bunch of words, the most important of which were to the effect that I should see a lawyer.
So if the question is: Will ChatGPT replace lawyers then the answer is some version of “no,” based on my little experiments.
If you ask it a legal question it eventually tells you to see a lawyer.
There is a line between ChatGPT being useful and it being misleading or even dangerous.
I think that line is between using generative AI to do something like get recipes or give factoids or pass an exam and using it to do creative or professional writing or actual research. It can do some things, apparently.
ChatGPT did pass an MBA final exam from a Wharton professor and did, barely, pass all three parts of the US Medical Licensing examination. It may be able to pass the multi-state bar exam. But, again, it can’t really write like a professional.
Of course, creative students have already started using ChatGPT to try to cheat on exams.
They’re getting caught, because there are countermeasures for teachers (or editors, I suppose).
One countermeasure is reading the results of the query, because they don’t read like a person wrote them.
Or do like New York City, which banned it in schools in January.
Various educators are also reportedly thinking about going back to blue books, oral exams or browsers that can block generative AI’s.
And then there is GPTZero, developed by a Princeton student over New Year’s break, which can detect if a given text was “probably” generated by ChatGPT.
Thousands of educators signed up for it in the few weeks after its launch.
So this is the tech that Microsoft is spending $13 billion on, and which “everyone” says will kill Google’s search algo, including people at Google.
There will be much more to come.
I’m finishing up this article about three months after ChatGPT’s launch so I’ll keep track of this dangerous app in the future.
In articles written by me. A human. Physically. Not by a bot.
Cause you all can tell if it’s not me, right?
Here are the results of my ChatGPT search outcomes:
Write a 350 word column on ChatGPT for lawyers
ChatGPT is a powerful language model developed by OpenAI that has the potential to revolutionize the way that lawyers work. At its core, ChatGPT is a machine learning algorithm that can generate human-like text based on a given prompt. This means that it can be used to write legal briefs, contracts, and other documents, as well as to answer legal questions and provide guidance on legal issues.
One of the most exciting applications of ChatGPT for lawyers is its ability to automate the drafting of legal documents. This can save lawyers a significant amount of time, as they will no longer need to spend hours writing and editing documents. Instead, they can simply provide ChatGPT with the relevant information and let the algorithm do the rest. This can be especially helpful for lawyers who handle a high volume of document preparation, such as those in large law firms or government agencies.
Another potential use of ChatGPT for lawyers is in the area of legal research. The model can be trained on a large dataset of legal cases and statutes, and then be able to quickly search for relevant information and provide answers to legal questions. This can help lawyers stay up-to-date on the latest legal developments and make more informed decisions.
ChatGPT can also be used to assist lawyers in providing legal advice to clients. The model can be trained on a wide range of legal topics and be able to provide guidance on legal issues and answer questions. This can help lawyers provide more efficient and accurate advice to their clients, which can improve client satisfaction and help to build trust.
In summary, ChatGPT is a powerful language model that has the potential to revolutionize the way that lawyers work. Its ability to automate the drafting of legal documents, perform legal research, and provide legal guidance can save lawyers time and improve their effectiveness. As the technology continues to evolve, it is likely that ChatGPT will become an increasingly important tool for lawyers.
Robot gives legal advice
how do I file a motion for a minor name change in Portage County, Ohio probate court?
To file a motion for a minor name change in Portage County, Ohio probate court, you will need to follow these steps:
1. Obtain the necessary forms from the probate court. These forms will include a petition for name change and any other forms required by the court.
2. Fill out the forms with the necessary information, including the current name of the minor, the proposed new name, and the reason for the name change.
3. File the forms with the probate court, along with any required fees.
4. Notify the other parent of the name change request, if applicable.
5. Attend a hearing where a judge will review your request and make a decision.
6. Follow any additional instructions or requirements provided by the court.
Please note that the above instructions may not be accurate, it is always best to check with the local court for the most up to date instructions and requirements.
Robot gives legal advice 2
what is the pretrial process for a divorce case in Summit County, Ohio?
In Summit County, Ohio, the pretrial process for a divorce case typically includes the following steps:
1. Filing a complaint for divorce: This is done by one spouse, who is known as the plaintiff, in the county where they reside.
2. Service of process: The complaint and a summons must be served on the other spouse, known as the defendant.
3. Filing an answer: The defendant has 28 days to file an answer to the complaint, in which they can agree or disagree with the allegations and raise any defenses.
4. Discovery: Both parties can gather information from the other through methods such as depositions, interrogatories, and requests for production of documents.
5. Mediation: The parties may be required to attend mediation in an attempt to resolve their differences.
6. Pretrial conference: A conference is held to discuss any unresolved issues and potentially reach a settlement.
7. If the case is not settled, it will go to trial. Keep in mind that these steps may vary depending on the specific facts of each case and the court's schedule and also it is always advisable to consult with an attorney.
Chat robot opinion snl
It is difficult to determine the "best" Saturday Night Live cast as it is a matter of personal opinion. Some people may argue that the original cast, which included comedians such as Chevy Chase, John Belushi, and Gilda Radner, was the best, while others may argue that a more recent cast, such as the one that included Will Ferrell, Jimmy Fallon, and Tina Fey, was the best.
More robot deflection
ChatGPT can assist with drafting legal contracts, but in order to do so, it would need specific information about the terms and conditions of the contract, as well as any relevant laws and regulations that apply. Additionally, it would be best if the contract is reviewed by a legal professional before it is considered binding.
Hey robot bro write me a contract:
I want ChatGPT to write a contract for a lawn mowing company to come to my house and mow my lawn every week. What information do you need? Can you actually write the contract?
Sure, to write a contract for a lawn mowing service, I would need the following information:
• Your name and address (where the lawn mowing service will be performed)
• The name and contact information of the lawn mowing company
• The specific terms of the service, such as the frequency of mowing (e.g. once a week), the cost of the service, the method of payment, and the length of the contract.
With that information, I can draft a contract for you. But please note that I am a language model and not a lawyer, so I would strongly recommend that you have a lawyer review the contract before signing it.
Here's a sample contract for your reference:
CONTRACT AGREEMENT
This agreement made and entered into this day of ____________ by and between ____________ (hereinafter referred to as "Client") and ____________ (hereinafter referred to as "Contractor").
1. Services: Contractor agrees to provide lawn mowing services to Client at the address of ____________ (hereinafter referred to as "Premises") on a weekly basis, as mutually agreed upon by the parties.
2. Payment: Client agrees to pay Contractor the sum of $____________ per week for the lawn mowing services provided. Payment shall be made on a weekly basis at the time of service.
3. Term: This agreement shall be for a period of ____________ (insert number) weeks, commencing on the date of this agreement.
4. Termination: Either party may terminate this agreement upon written notice to the other party.
5. Governing Law: This agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of ____________.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this agreement as of the date first above written.
Client: ________________________
Contractor: ________________________
Please note that the above sample contract is just for reference and is not legally binding without proper signature from both parties.
Look up a case. I was looking for the entire case.
Brown v. Board of Education was a landmark 1954 Supreme Court case in which the Court declared that segregation in public schools was unconstitutional. The case was brought by a group of African American parents and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) who argued that their children were being denied equal educational opportunities because of the "separate but equal" doctrine, which allowed for racial segregation in public schools. The Court's unanimous decision in favor of the plaintiffs marked a major turning point in the Civil Rights Movement and helped to pave the way for further desegregation efforts.
2 Please provide the entire text of Brown:
I'm sorry, but the text of the case Brown v. Board of Education is quite long and I would be unable to provide it to you in its entirety here. The case was decided by the United States Supreme Court in 1954 and it declared that state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students were unconstitutional. The ruling marked a major turning point in the Civil Rights Movement and had a significant impact on ending racial segregation in the United States. If you would like to read the full text of the case, it is readily available online from a number of reputable sources.
Brown expanded
have there been any cases in the US supreme court that modified Brown v. Board of Education? With citations.
There have been several cases in the US Supreme Court that have further clarified and expanded upon the ruling in Brown v. Board of Education. Here are a few examples:
• Green v. County School Board of New Kent County (1968): The Court ruled that "token" desegregation, in which only a small number of African American students were admitted to previously all-white schools, was not enough to satisfy the requirements of Brown v. Board.
• Milliken v. Bradley (1974): The Court ruled that school districts could not be ordered to bus students across city or district lines in order to achieve racial desegregation.
• Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 (2007): The Court ruled that race could not be the sole factor in assigning students to schools, but it could be one of many factors considered in the interest of diversity.
• Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin (2013): The Court ruled that universities could use race as a factor in admissions decisions, but they had to prove that it was necessary to achieve diversity and that no other race-neutral alternatives were available.
These are just a few examples, there are many more cases that modify Brown v. Board of Education.
Notice: no cites.
2. So, since ChatGPT gives its “legal research” with no citations, I finally just had to ask it the obvious:
what is the cite for brown v. board of education?
The citation for the landmark Supreme Court case Brown v. Board of Education is 347 U.S. 483 (1954).



[Back]