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
On the board but frozen out: The Taib family feud tearing Sarawak construction giant apart
As more Asean states turn to Russia for fuel, will Moscow boost its influence in the region?
Thai and Vietnamese farmers may stop planting rice because of the Iran war. Here’s why
Is it time to scrap COE categories for cars?
