[vouaobrasil]

The next step after this is more complicated laws because lawyers can now use LLMs, and thus laws even more opaque to ordinary folk who will have to use LLMs to understand anything. It's an even more fragile system that will undoubtedly be in favour of those who can wield the most powerful LLM, or in other words, the rich and the corporations.

This is another example of technology making things temporarily easier, until the space is filled with an equal dose of complexity. It is Newton's third law for technological growth: if technology asserts a force to make life simpler, society will fill that void with an equal force in the opposite direction to make it even more complex.

[efitz]

In the US, the vast majority of legislators are lawyers. Lawyers have their own “unions” (eg the American Bar Association”).

I can definitely see this kind of protectionism occurring.

OTOH, I also see potential for a proliferation of law firms offering online services that are LLM-driven for specific scenarios, or tech firms (LegalZoom etc) offering similar services, and hiring a lawyer on staff to ensure that they can’t be sued for providing unlicensed legal advice.

In other words it might compete with lawyers at the low end, but big law could co-opt it to take advantage of efficiency increases over hiring interns and junior lawyers.

[ed_balls]

You can solve it be assigning a complexity score to a law. If the law increases complexity you need a supermajority to pass it, otherwise simple majority is ok.

[lpribis]

How would you define "complexity score"? The complexity of options trading regulation should not be subject to the same complexity threshold as (eg) public intoxication laws.

[ed_balls]

It's quite hard, it would be a mixture or references, conditions, size of all legislation.

>The complexity of options trading regulation should not be subject to the same complexity threshold as (eg) public intoxication laws

Why not? The point is to make it a bit harder to pass more complex laws, not stopping it. Your parliament has 500 seats. You need 251 votes to pass new complex law. For laws that simplify complexity you need half of the present MPs e.g. 400 are in, so you need 201 votes.

[sumeruchat]

Lmao dont make up laws like that please. If anything my guess is that LLMs will make laws simpler and without loopholes and rich people wont be able to hire lawyers to have a competitive advantage in exploiting legal loopholes

[vouaobrasil]

Isn't it true though, at least in terms of the amount of information we have to wade through these days? Haven't hard drives gotten larger, and why? Because technology makes it possible. It's funny that you are laughing, but it would be even better if you made a serious argument against me.

To be honest, I am posing a serious possibility: are we really sure that AI will cause a democratization of knowledge? I mean, our society is valuable and keeps us alive, so shouldn't we be at least asking the question?

It seems like even questioning technology around here is taboo. What's wrong with discussing it openly? I think it's rather naive to believe that technology will make life simpler for the average person. I've lived long enough to know that many inventions, such as the internet and smartphone, have NOT made life easier at all for many, although they bring superficial conveniences.

[sumeruchat]

Look i think its true that technology makes life worse in many ways but making the legal system complex is not one of those things in my opinion.

There is nothing wrong with your position its just that you are trying to make weak generalizations driven primarily by your emotions and anecdotal experience and not data

[vouaobrasil]

Well, I look forward to an easy refutation then.

[sumeruchat]

Well yes. This makes life better because

1) This tech makes it easy for anyone to file a complex legal complaint to a situation and then send it to the right legal department for almost free.

2) You can now ask a complex legal question and get a response for almost free. (Example is reckless driving a crime here ? What is the fine? LLM looks up your coordinates, the laws there and then gives you the exact response)

3) Even if you dont know the language this tech translates the laws for you and gives you an expert analysis for almost free.

I easily see this as a win for the less powerful.

[freejazz]

>1) This tech makes it easy for anyone to file a complex legal complaint to a situation and then send it to the right legal department for almost free.

That's the assumption.

>2) You can now ask a complex legal question and get a response for almost free. (Example is reckless driving a crime here ? What is the fine? LLM looks up your coordinates, the laws there and then gives you the exact response)

I don't think that's a 'complex legal question'

>3) Even if you dont know the language this tech translates the laws for you and gives you an expert analysis for almost free.

That's not what expert means.