ChatGPT Acts Like My Teenager
When ChatGPT-3 first came out, I used the analogy that it acted like my 13-year-old; assertive and often persuasive, yet with a tendency to make mistakes in ways that an adult could easily spot. Now, when discussing ChatGPT-4, I like to say that it acts like my 18-year-old; it’s still assertive but more sophisticated and provides arguments that are much harder to refute. Thus, it is incumbent upon legal professionals to remember that, like a teenager stepping into adulthood, ChatGPT-4, despite its advancements, is not infallible. It's a tool, not a legal authority. And as ChatGPT matures, its capabilities in constructing arguments and drafting documents will only continue to improve so we must remain vigilant.
For lawyers who are considering the incorporation of ChatGPT into their practices, the key is to use it wisely and judiciously. Imagine ChatGPT-4 as a talented but inexperienced, summer intern. Its work, while impressive, demands careful scrutiny. This means thoroughly reviewing AI-generated content, cross-checking citations, critically assessing arguments, and verifying facts. Like guiding a summer intern, lawyers should give time to reflect on the work, revisiting it after a pause, and maybe even seeking a second opinion from a colleague.
It's also imperative to highlight that ChatGPT is not a specialized legal tool. It lacks real-time updates on laws and case precedents, and its understanding of legal nuances is limited. Lawyers must leverage their expertise to evaluate the relevance and accuracy of the LLM’s output.
And remember, privacy and confidentiality are paramount so any lawyers considering using ChatGPT must exercise caution and avoid entering sensitive or client-specific information into ChatGPT. The platform is not a secure repository for confidential data, and mishandling such information could lead to ethical breaches and erosion of client trust.
In conclusion, while ChatGPT can be a valuable asset, it cannot replace the nuanced judgment and expertise of a seasoned lawyer. It should be approached as a supplementary tool, one that aids but does not dictate legal processes. By striking a balance between AI assistance and human oversight, lawyers may be able to effectively harness the potential of ChatGPT or other LLM while upholding their professional and ethical responsibilities.
