Earlier this week, the well-known commentator Seth Godin observed,
“One of the valid complaints about some AI systems is that they make stuff up, with confidence, and without sourcing, and then argue when challenged.
Unsurprisingly, this sounds a lot like people.”
In evaluating whether lawyers should use Gen AI tools, lawyers (and legal commentators, for that matter), often forget that humans (lawyers) make mistakes. They make shit up. As one of my former partners once observed, “So and so may be wrong, but he is never unsure.” And even when wrong, boy, can lawyers argue they are nevertheless right.Continue Reading Gen AI and Law: Perfection Is Not the Point
Last January, I wrote an 
Much has been written about the ethical duties of a lawyer regarding technology, a duty found in Rule 1.1 (competence), Rule 1.6 (confidentiality), Rule 1.5 (ethical billing) and Rules 5.1 and 5.3 (supervisory responsibilities). These rules and their nuances should in and of themselves be enough for lawyers to be as inquisitive and knowledgeable about tech as they are the substantive law.