Mark C. Palmer

<div id="custom-general-copy-block_9a324d2ed7b558565f5946d2dafcdb3d" class="block general_copy background-default block-custom-general-copy alignfull pt-default pb-default">
							
						<div class="block-copy">
							<img decoding="async" loading="lazy" class="aligncenter wp-image-23240 size-large" src="https://www.2civility.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Chat-GPT-1024x605.jpg" alt="Businessman holding hologram Chat GPT" width="640" height="378" srcset="http://civility.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Chat-GPT-1024x605.jpg 1024w, http://civility.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Chat-GPT-300x177.jpg 300w, http://civility.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Chat-GPT-768x453.jpg 768w, http://civility.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Chat-GPT.jpg 1333w" sizes="(max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px" />Like many, I came to Chicago for the 2023 ABA <a href="https://www.techshow.com/">TechShow</a> knowing that ChatGPT was going to be a buzzword in the hallways, sessions, and panels. That was no surprise as it has been trending (including in legal tech circles) since its public launch in November 2022.
My goal as a TechShow attendee was two-fold: (1) Gain a better understanding of how <a href="https://chat.openai.com/auth/login">ChatGPT</a> works, and (2) attempt to put aside the hype to objectively evaluate its potential impact on how lawyers work.
Here is what I discovered and why I am excited about what ChatGPT can do for <a href="https://www.2civility.org/what-technology-tools-are-growing-law-firms-using/">legal services</a>.
<h3>How does ChatGPT do its thing?</h3>
 ChatGPT is a large language model (LLM) trained by <a href="https://openai.com/">OpenAI</a> that uses learning techniques to generate human-like responses to natural language inputs, called prompts.
At its core, ChatGPT is a neural network that has been trained on vast amounts of text data to predict the language most likely to follow a given sequence of words.
In the TechShow session “ChatGPT for Lawyers,” which was facilitated by <a href="https://twitter.com/lawdroid">Tom Martin</a> of <a href="https://lawdroid.com/">LawDroid</a> and <a href="https://twitter.com/carolynelefant">Carolyn Elefant</a> of <a href="https://myshingle.com/">MyShingle</a> (a former speaker at the Commission’s <a href="https://thefutureisnow.2civility.org/speaker/carolyn-elefant/?Year=2019">Future Is Now: Legal Services</a> conference), Martin helped us understand how ChatGPT creates generative responses rather than automated outputs.
In other words, when forming an answer, ChatGPT adapts to the relationships of the parameters given rather than following a predetermined decision tree.
Martin reviewed three key components of ChatGPT: vectors, tokens, and temperature.
Vectors – ChatGPT uses vectors to represent words. Think of a vector as a mathematical arrow à that has both a magnitude and a direction. In the case of ChatGPT, each word in its vocabulary is represented by a vector in a high-dimensional space.
These vectors are learned during training using a technique called word embedding, which maps words to dense numerical vectors that capture the meaning and relationships between words.
Tokens – A token is a sequence of characters that represents a unit of meaning, such as a word or a punctuation mark. For example, the prompt “What is the meaning of life?” has seven tokens, one for each word and one for the question mark.
In ChatGPT, the input text is tokenized into individual tokens that are then fed into the neural network. The model uses these tokens to generate a probability distribution for the next word in the sequence, based on the context provided by the preceding words.
A single prompt is limited to 1,000 tokens (~1.5 pages of content), so you cannot paste an entire appellate brief into ChatGPT and ask for an analysis…yet.
Temperature – ChatGPT uses a technique called temperature sampling to control the level of randomness in its responses. Temperature is a hyperparameter that determines the degree of randomness in the output generated by the model.
Think of a dial between zero and two. Turning the temperature up toward two leads to more diverse and unpredictable responses while turning it down to zero leads to more conservative and predictable responses.
In practice, ChatGPT works by taking in a sequence of tokens and generating a probability distribution over the next possible tokens. The model then samples from this distribution to generate the next token in the sequence, and the process is repeated until a stopping criterion is reached.
When ChatGPT was released on November 30, 2022, it was working with data containing 175 billion parameters and limited knowledge of events after 2021. The next version, ChatGPT 4.0, is expected to be released in 2023. It will have 100 trillion parameters that are expected to <a href="https://becominghuman.ai/the-future-of-ai-gpt-3-vs-gpt-4-a-comparative-analysis-5ac525cb7ae1">enhance its abilities, including creativity</a>.
The output generated by ChatGPT is often remarkably human-like, and the model has proven to be a powerful tool for a wide range of natural language processing tasks, including language translation, question-answering, and chatbot development.
<h3>Putting ChatGPT to work for legal services</h3>
During TechShow’s LegalTech Visionaries panel, <a href="https://twitter.com/erinlevine_">Erin Levine</a> of <a href="https://hellodivorce.com/">Hello Divorce</a> (and another former <a href="https://thefutureisnow.2civility.org/speaker/erin-levine/?Year=2022">Future Is Now speaker</a>) put it bluntly when she said, “ChatGPT is not going to replace [lawyers], it’s going to make us look like superheroes.”
Although she described writing prompts for ChatGPT “like talking at a 10-year-old,” she told attendees that she is not only using the platform to help draft social media and marketing content but is exploring where it could fit in servicing her clients.
Visionaries panelist <a href="https://twitter.com/jazzhamptonESQ">Jazz Hampton</a> of <a href="https://www.turnsignl.com/">TurnSignl</a> described ChatGPT as a “great launching point” for content and admitted he often uses it to draft LinkedIn posts. Once you recognize its capabilities, he said, you may ask it to modify content as well as tone or style. For example, asking ChatGPT to edit a LinkedIn post to be more cheerful.
In the TechShow session “Using AI and Data Analytics in Litigation,” <a href="https://twitter.com/stephenembryjd">Steve Embry</a> of <a href="https://www.techlawcrossroads.com/">TechLaw Crossroads</a> queued up a discussion for <a href="https://twitter.com/tweetatpablo">Pablo Arredondo</a> of <a href="https://casetext.com/">Casetext</a> by asking a question that is probably on the minds of many lawyers: “<a href="https://www.techlawcrossroads.com/2023/03/ai-generative-ai-chatgpt-robot-lawyers-why-should-i-care-are-robots-going-to-replace-us/">So what?</a>”
In short, Embry answered his own question. He said that ChatGPT has already proved itself as a tool for lawyers seeking to deliver legal services more efficiently (faster) and effectively (lawyers doing lawyer work).
From assisting with legal writing to streamlining client communications, ChatGPT offers a range of benefits that can enhance lawyers’ ability to provide quality legal representation, Embry said.
For example, with its <a href="https://openai.com/blog/introducing-chatgpt-and-whisper-apis">open API</a>, ChatGPT may enhance law firms’ abilities to respond to client inquiries, schedule appointments, and provide updates on case progress.
This can help lawyers free up valuable time that would otherwise be spent on administrative tasks, allowing them to focus more on the legal aspects of their practice.
<h3>Legal prompts for ChatGPT</h3>
Below are prompts Martin and Elefant shared that lawyers may want to try entering into ChatGPT. As a reminder, a prompt is language supplied by a human that is the starting point for ChatGPT&#8217;s response.
Prompts can range from short questions to complex legal situations. The better and more specific a prompt the higher the likelihood that you will receive an accurate response.
<h5>Prompts for assisting legal writing</h5>
<ul>
<li>Draft a demand letter for an auto accident case [with specific details for injuries and dollar amounts]</li>
<li>Draft interrogatories and requests to produce documents for [specific cause of action and facts from a Complaint]</li>
</ul>
<h5> Prompts for legal marketing</h5>
<ul>
<li>Draft a polite response to this negative online review: [paste review]</li>
<li>Write sample YouTube titles with short descriptions for videos [about a topic]</li>
<li>Write an outline for an eBook about the probate administration process in California, include a short summary for each step of the outline, and use language suitable for an 8th-grade reading level</li>
<li>Also for this eBook, develop a legal disclaimer and color scheme and propose a cover photo and a title</li>
<li>Write a 5-day email plan for client marketing [with specific details about the topic]</li>
</ul>
<h5>Prompts for administrative work</h5>
<ul>
<li>Convert information from this paragraph into an organized spreadsheet: [paste paragraph]</li>
</ul>
<h3>ChatGPT ‘hallucinations’</h3>
While ChatGPT may allow lawyers to focus more of their time on legal work, I would like to share a notable caveat from my research: when asking ChatGPT legal research questions, be mindful that it can get confused about what is real and what is fiction.
For example, when I asked it to provide caselaw on a topic, it cited and described three cases from three different jurisdictions that were all relevant to my prompt.
However, while they sounded very convincing, the cases were fake. So, I followed up my prompt by asking for “actual cases.” This caused it to first discuss a “real case” and then to say that the real case wasn’t a real case when I asked for the citation.
Confused? You can see the screenshots in this <a href="https://twitter.com/palmerlaw/status/1618637905190359041">Twitter thread</a>.
Arredondo called these errors “hallucinations” that can nevertheless be very convincing. When asked if the newer versions of ChatGPT would be any better at deciphering fact from fiction, he said, “No, in fact, they will only be more convincing!”
However, when the OpenAI model is integrated with a data set (for example, cases, documents, etc.), it can draw upon reliable data to produce accurate, factual answers that are supported by real citations.
Basically, when the model is applied to data, it can improve accuracy (though caution should still be applied). For example, Docket Alarm uses GPT-3 artificial intelligence to <a href="https://www.lawnext.com/2023/01/docket-alarm-now-uses-gpt-3-to-show-you-summaries-of-pdf-litigation-filings-as-you-review-docket-sheets.html">summarize case filings without having to open them</a>.
<h3>We still need attorneys ‘at the helm’</h3>
While ChatGPT might help lawyers improve their writing skills or act as a virtual legal assistant in some respects, it will not replace the critical thinking, legal expertise, judgment, and empathy that human lawyers bring to their practice. ChatGPT should be viewed as a tool to enhance the legal practice, rather than a replacement for it.
Arredondo put it well when he said, “it still needs the attorney at the helm.”
As the legal industry continues to evolve, ChatGPT and other LLMs will likely be used more in legal practice. Lawyers must stay informed on these technologies, so they can separate reality from hype and meet the changing needs of their clients more efficiently and effectively than ever before.
We will be discussing legal innovation and technology in your practice at our virtual Future Is Now: Legal Services conference. <a href="https://thefutureisnow.2civility.org/">Register today</a> and join us on April 20! CLE is available.
<blockquote class="wp-embedded-content" data-secret="089j9TJUIs"><a href="https://www.2civility.org/early-bird-registration-ends-for-future-is-now-2023/">Early Bird Registration Ends 3/15 for 2023 Future Is Now: Legal Services Conference</a></blockquote>
<iframe class="wp-embedded-content" sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" title="&#8220;Early Bird Registration Ends 3/15 for 2023 Future Is Now: Legal Services Conference&#8221; &#8212; 2Civility" src="https://www.2civility.org/early-bird-registration-ends-for-future-is-now-2023/embed/#?secret=B2MjCY8L2g#?secret=089j9TJUIs" data-secret="089j9TJUIs" width="600" height="338" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no"></iframe>
<blockquote class="wp-embedded-content" data-secret="q6zuJkHrLL"><a href="https://www.2civility.org/what-lawyers-need-to-know-to-avoid-phishing-attacks/">Shields Up! What Lawyers Need to Know to Avoid Phishing Attacks</a></blockquote>
<iframe class="wp-embedded-content" sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" title="&#8220;Shields Up! What Lawyers Need to Know to Avoid Phishing Attacks&#8221; &#8212; 2Civility" src="https://www.2civility.org/what-lawyers-need-to-know-to-avoid-phishing-attacks/embed/#?secret=n2CXC0Fpv6#?secret=q6zuJkHrLL" data-secret="q6zuJkHrLL" width="600" height="338" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no"></iframe>
<blockquote class="wp-embedded-content" data-secret="10Vhg6jdFm"><a href="https://www.2civility.org/clio-legal-trends-report-anticipates-stress-in-a-strong-legal-marketplace/">Clio Legal Trends Report Anticipates Stress in a Strong Legal Marketplace  </a></blockquote>
<iframe class="wp-embedded-content" sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" title="&#8220;Clio Legal Trends Report Anticipates Stress in a Strong Legal Marketplace  &#8221; &#8212; 2Civility" src="https://www.2civility.org/clio-legal-trends-report-anticipates-stress-in-a-strong-legal-marketplace/embed/#?secret=lUCvoBS7fN#?secret=10Vhg6jdFm" data-secret="10Vhg6jdFm" width="600" height="338" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no"></iframe>
			</div>
	</div>


The post <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.2civility.org/why-chatgpt-matters-to-the-future-of-legal-services/">Why ChatGPT Matters for the Future of Legal Services</a> appeared first on <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.2civility.org">2Civility</a>.

My goal as a TechShow attendee was two-fold: (1) Gain a better understanding of how ChatGPT works, and (2) attempt to put aside the hype to objectively evaluate its potential impact on how lawyers work. Here is what I discovered and why I am excited about what ChatGPT can do for legal services. 
The post Why ChatGPT Matters for the Future of Legal Services appeared first on 2Civility.

Illinois Supreme Court Commission on Professionalism

Clio Manage

Clio Grow

Docket Alarm

TurnSignl

Docket

Lawyaw

LawDroid Builder

Casetext

Why ChatGPT Matters for the Future of Legal Services

Bob Ambrogi

<img width="1024" height="576" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/TechshowExpo-1024x576.jpg" class="attachment-large size-large wp-post-image" alt="" decoding="async" loading="lazy" style="float:left; margin:0 15px 15px 0;" />At <a href="https://www.techshow.com/">ABA TECHSHOW</a> in Chicago last week, it struck me that it is conceivable that an attendee could be the third generation within a family to have been to a TECHSHOW. After all, the conference was first held nearly four decades ago, <a href="https://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/aba_techshow_enters_its_30th_year_highlighting_legal_technology">way back in in 1987</a>. That means that, in a multi-generational family of lawyers, an attendee this year could well have had a parent and grandparent attend in some prior year. That is pure speculation, of course, but the point is that TECHSHOW has been around so long that the original attendees are now probably someone’s grandparents.
For TECHSHOW, that endurance is both a blessing and a curse. The blessing is that its longstanding reputation as a preeminent and trailblazing legal tech show enables it to attract A-list speakers and a loyal contingent of attendees. The curse is that the show has, in some years, showed signs of its age, and for a period, it seemed to have been stuck in a legacy rut. As a greater number and variety of legal tech conferences have sprung up in recent years, the challenge for the 36-year-old TECHSHOW is to continue to deliver the kind of practical programming lawyers have come to expect, while also being as sprightly and cutting-edge as the newer generation of conferences.
It is a daunting challenge indeed. In fact, several years ago, the ABA convened a somewhat-stealth committee, separate from the TECHSHOW planning board, to brainstorm the longer-term vision for TECHSHOW and come up with ways to give it a contemporary refresh. Having <del>been roped into</del> volunteered for that committee, I can tell you that we never came up with any magic formulas.
Against this backdrop, I am pleased to report that TECHSHOW 2023 was not your grandparents’ TECHSHOW — not even your parents&#8217; TECHSHOW. The atmosphere was highly energized, the audience was highly enthusiastic, and the overall focus skillfully maintained that balance between practical and cutting edge. The programs were informative and compelling and the numbers of both attendees and exhibitors exceeded the pre-Pandemic numbers of TECHSHOW 2020.
<div id="attachment_43046" style="width: 1034px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><a href="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/image1-scaled.jpeg"><img aria-describedby="caption-attachment-43046" decoding="async" loading="lazy" class="size-large wp-image-43046" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/image1-1024x768.jpeg" alt="" width="1024" height="768" /></a>Six of the panelists from the weekly Legaltech Week podcast got to hang out: Steve Embry, Victor Li, Stephanie Wilkins, Niki Black, Joe Patrice, and me.</div>
Credit for all of this goes to the TECHSHOW planning board. If you are not aware of what happens behind the curtains of TECHSHOW, it is all planned and put together by a volunteer board of legal professionals who sink considerable time and effort into the planning process. This year&#8217;s board was co-chaired by Jeannine Lambert; executive director of centers and programming at Northern Kentucky University Chase College of Law; and Gyi Tsakalakis, founder of AttorneySync; with assistance from co-vice-chairs Sofia Stefanie Lingos, founding and managing attorney of Trident Legal; and Cynthia Thomas, owner of law firm management consulting company PLMC &amp; Associates.
Other members of the board were Heidi Barcus, shareholder at Lewis Thomason; Kenton Brice, director of technology innovation at the University of Oklahoma College of Law;  Nkoyo-Ene Effiong, director of the Law Practice Management Program for the State Bar of Georgia; Carolyn Elefant, owner of Law Offices of Carolyn Elefant and publisher of MyShingle.com; Ivan Hemmans, senior manager of technical development at O’Melveny &amp; Myers LLP; Darla Jackson, director of the Mabee Legal Information Center at the University of Tulsa College of Law; and Jayne R. Reardon, former executive director of the Illinois Supreme Court Commission on Professionalism.
One stroke of conference-planning genius this year was to abandon the standard keynote presentations in favor of keynote sessions that tackled contemporary topics in dynamic ways.
Let’s face it: Keynote speakers more often fall flat than inspire. (I say that as someone who has been a keynoter.) Conference organizers throw too much money at big names who know nothing about the audience, in the hope that they’ll help draw attendance. Keynote sessions are often a waste of the conference’s money and the attendees’ time.
<div id="attachment_43051" style="width: 1034px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><a href="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/ABA-Techshow-2023-Keynote-Speakers-scaled.jpg"><img aria-describedby="caption-attachment-43051" decoding="async" loading="lazy" class="wp-image-43051 size-large" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/ABA-Techshow-2023-Keynote-Speakers-1024x461.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="461" /></a>The legaltech visionaries panel was moderated by Jack Newton of Clio and featured Kimberly Bennett of Fidu, Jazz Hampton of TurnSignl and Erin Levine of Hello Divorce.</div>
This year, TECHSHOW scratched keynotes and replaced them with two interactive sessions. On the first day was a panel of “legaltech visionaries” – aka legal tech company founders Erin Levine of Hello Divorce, Kimberly Bennett of Fidu, and Jazz Hampton of TurnSignl – in a conversation moderated by Jack Newton, founder and CEO of Clio. Notably, while this panel could easily have addressed itself to budding entrepreneurs, it instead stayed focus on TECHSHOW’s true audience, legal practitioners, helping them understand why these companies matter to them and their clients.
The second day keynote session was a mock public hearing on proposals to amend Professional Conduct Rules 5.4 and 5.5. Moderated by the aforementioned Jayne Reardon, the idea was to stage a fictional committee meeting to debate changes similar to those adopted in Utah and Arizona. Although I did not attend this session, I heard nothing but rave reviews. Even without having attended, I have no doubt that, for those who did, it was far more engaging than yet another clueless big name speaker.
Beyond these keynote sessions, the panels spanned a balance of practical, contemporary, and future-looking subjects, with topics that ranged from the basic (such as what’s new in Word) to the current (AI and data analytics) to the next (the hybrid law firm of the future).
<div id="attachment_43048" style="width: 1034px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><a href="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/KimBennettStartup-Alley-scaled.jpg"><img aria-describedby="caption-attachment-43048" decoding="async" loading="lazy" class="size-large wp-image-43048" src="https://www.lawnext.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/KimBennettStartup-Alley-1024x540.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="540" /></a>Fidu founder Kim Bennett presenting at the Startup Alley pitch competition.</div>
Once again this year, I hosted the opening night event, the Startup Alley pitch competition. I&#8217;ve already posted about <a href="https://www.lawnext.com/2023/03/so-this-happened-and-for-once-i-had-no-words.html">something that happened</a> during that event, and I&#8217;ll post separately about the results.
The only program that felt like a throwback to TECHSHOWs long past was the “60 in 60” plenary program. TECHSHOW has a longstanding tradition of wrapping up with a rapid-fire session that has evolved from 60 sites to 60 tips to 60 gadgets and gizmos. This year’s program was intended to be a mash-up of all of those. But to me, it felt like an oldies show on an obscure cable channel. How many of these sites and tips and gizmos have we seen before, and how many years ago did we first see them? (Text Expander, I’m looking at you.)
My only other complaint – which is really a compliment – is that it all seemed too short. The exhibit hall opened Wednesday night with a reception and closed 2 p.m. Friday (an hour earlier than planned, thanks to threats of snow). That left little time to both attend sessions and browse booths. While TECHSHOW traditionally spilled over into Saturday, this year it ended Friday night, save for a Saturday morning breakfast. That had many people already heading out just two days after they’d arrived.
But these are minor nits. My impression – and the consensus of everyone I asked – was that this was one of the best TECHSHOWs ever, at once practical and vital and relevant.
It certainly was not your grandparents&#8217; TECHSHOW.
&nbsp;

At ABA TECHSHOW in Chicago last week, it struck me that it is conceivable that an attendee could be the third generation within a family to have been to a TECHSHOW. After all, the conference was first held nearly four decades ago, way back in in 1987. That means that, in a multi-generational family of […]

Ask a Lawyer

Why ChatGPT Matters for the Future of Legal Services

This Was Not Your Grandparents’ ABA TECHSHOW