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
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.
KEYWORDS IN THIS ARTICLE
BT is now on Telegram!
For daily updates on weekdays and specially selected content for the weekend. Subscribe to t.me/BizTimes
Opinion & Features
The dog ate Japan’s plan to phase out coal power
If inflation continues to build, the Fed won’t be able to maintain neutral stance for long
Singapore offices await a new wave of tenants
S-chip IPOs may be coming again, but don’t count on investors getting too excited
London watchdog’s name-and-shame plan is mad, bad and dangerous to the City
Foxconn’s musical chairs sound like punk rock