Will Computer Learning Replace Lawyer Earning?
This post has been viewed 2,363 times.
In the legal profession discovery documents are classified and contract clauses are analyzed using so-called machine learning, artificial intelligence or predictive coding. But this is just the start. Will advances in computer science lead to technology that can actually do what we think we do better and more efficiently? Will smart robot attorneys be able to assess all the variables in a case and arrive at a precise exposure analysis and settlement value in seconds? Will they be able to take in all of the information in an M&A transaction, conduct due diligence, assess value, risk, and market implications faster than it takes a person to draft an engagement letter?
But what about the basic question, do computers actually think in the way that we do? Or is it something else? Maybe a better, but scarier, question is, how much of what we do as lawyers actually requires thinking and how much can be relegated to robots and automation?
As the quote above from the book suggests, this is not a new question. Alan Turing, considered the father of the modern computer, and the subject of a recent movie, The Imitation Game, wrote a paper, interestingly, also published in 1950, the same year as I, Robot, called Computing Machinery and Intelligence.
Read original articleTags:
