Robot judges – not a question of legitimacy but of choice
It’s a misconception that decisions made by AI are necessarily random and irrational, as an illustrative example shows
Add BT as a preferred source
COMMUNICATION is the cornerstone of the legal profession – whether it involves preparing advice, drafting documents, or presenting arguments.
It is therefore unsurprising that the emergence of generative artificial intelligence (AI) large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, which are capable of producing human-like conversational responses has sparked discourse on whether they can fully replace the legal profession.
The prevailing sentiment is that they cannot do so.
TRENDING NOW
Ohmyhome Ltd sells real estate business for token US$1 due to poor business and continued losses
Malaysian tycoon Vincent Tan’s sell-downs point to pruning rather than an exit plan
Buyer for England striker Harry Kane’s former mansion must pay £3.4 million after abandoning deal
EU and Asean at 50: time for bold action
