This works for pretty much every field. AI can be useful for legal research and drafting. But you cannot know when the research and writing it generates is good and when it is worthless, unless you are already an experienced attorney.
Reposted from
John Bull
Was at a conference dinner a while back and one guy said "The future is AI. It doesn't replace senior developers, but no more need for juniors."
To which i replied:
"Where do you think senior developers come from. Straight from the womb?"
He went quiet, then wandered off to a different huddle.
To which i replied:
"Where do you think senior developers come from. Straight from the womb?"
He went quiet, then wandered off to a different huddle.
Comments
While you're exponentially wasting energy.
https://bsky.app/profile/tiffanycli.bsky.social/post/3loqr6gif2c2q
“But private sector trainers can do it..” I pointed out we sell what the market will pay for, and they don’t pay for that yet.
Most likely the profession becomes gated by money & connections, but if client base broadens then there is maybe a way.
We will need to plan for how to develop those skills and, bluntly, nobody really seems to be doing that.
While Google pre-AI was polluted with garbage, it actually provides less garbage than the AI slop machine. & since that slop is now written out without need for a new click, more will just assume "Google said it, so it must be right".
They sound like ones that would, of course; which seems to be the point.
> A June 2024 paper found that even the best-performing LLM, GPT-4, hallucinated at least 49% of the time on the most basic case summary tasks presented.
Noooooo.
A skilled person can see the faults better. It’s not safe for most inexperienced people to do that.