Legal Ethics Archives - Wasatch GC

Thoughts on generative AI in the legal profession

Danny Barber — Tue, 05 Dec 2023 19:09:33 +0000

Entry #3 - The importance of the Author's voice and the ineffable

December 5, 2023

First, a common trope:

If you were to raise an owl without prior experience,

should you try to learn how to raise an owl first,

or just go find an owl egg and figure it out.

This journal entry is about my ~~owl~~ robot.

Yes, I use a robot. More than one in fact.

In hindsight, it took me too long to realize it in the first place.

We are better at different things, sometimes bad for each other, but mostly have a productive relationship.

As far as I can tell…

But there are some things I will just do myself, because what else am I going to do?

What is it that I do? Good question.

Often when I am trying to explain to someone what I do all day, I start small:

“I type a lot.”

It’s a basic joke, but quite effective.

Far better than:

“I can’t really tell you all that much about what I do, sorry.”

It’s much better to start with a modest joke.

It also isn’t a lie, which we lawyers can’t do remember (unless it’s “bluster”, whatever that is).

I actually do type a lot, sometimes all day, and about all kinds of things.

And I care a lot about how I type. I enjoy the act of typing, especially with music. I enjoy choosing the font, paragraph spacing, nerd stuff.

Overall, I enjoy thinking about how the words are going to appear to the reader.

I also really enjoy reading, especially about interesting words.

Some words I find really interesting are: Proprioception, Consciousness, Percipient, Qualia, and Sonder.

Another patent word that is interesting is “lexicographer” (a person who defines words, sometimes new ones).

I guess I should start saying:

“I type a lot, and I read a lot of words (preferably interesting ones, sometimes new ones).”

I’m also trying to learn more about linguistics.

It seems interesting, I’m just not great at it.

But a robot is helping explain it to me.

As far as I can tell…

At a high level, it seems important because language is a “medium through which thoughts, ideas, and knowledge are expressed and communicated.”

So at this point I guess I should start saying:

“I type a lot, I read a lot of words (preferably interesting ones, sometimes new ones), because it’s how thoughts, ideas, and knowledge are expressed and communicated.”

Much better.

Now, because I like words so much, you would think that I would be really worried about some new word robot that is better at words than I am.

You’d be right. It’s fascinating.

In fact, I am a bit surprised at how fast it happened.

But in hindsight, I guess I’ve been contributing to the creation of these robots since I was a kid.

I got my first internet connected computer in the 90’s.

Since then, I’ve gone from:

watching a song download for a full day on Napster,

to:

streaming a song over cellular to my phone in the middle of the mountains, while simultaneously playing that song over the speakers in my car via Bluetooth, while that same car is (mostly) driving itself, and also while I am having fictitious conversations with a word robot just to see what it will say, while using a different search robot to make sure the word robot isn’t just making things up (or in patent speak – “acting as its own lexicographer”).

And it is interesting how it works.

As far as I can tell.

According to it, it is pre-trained on a lot of words, and from those words, it learned how probable a string of more words would be, in response to any new words I ask it.

Quite the trick. It’s “neural network” computational architecture must really work.

But hey, my neural network works to, and is more complex!

If anything, the words I chose to provide my word robot are just as important as the pretty ones it sends back to me.

Don’t get me wrong, it often does have the “best” words, in the “best” order.

Very informative, if occasionally forgivably inaccurate words.

Its words are impressive.

They’ve improved my words, especially my science words.

Its words would otherwise be a death sentence in student loans.

But you know what?

Sometimes, I don’t like its words.

And that is a big relief – because its words are different than my words.

And you know what else, the systems I have access to also have an obvious design flaw: they are only trained on language, and not trained on the “ineffable” aspects of being a human.

Because at the end of the day, lawyers designed a pretty good Turing test – a jury of your peers.

Convincing a group of twelve strangers of your perspective is hard for humans. I don’t think robots are there yet, if they ever will be.

How do you teach a robot to communicate “ineffable” things like sincerity of belief, empathy of condition, and trustworthiness.

A jury of peers seems to accomplish that feat by looking real people in the eyes.

Maybe we should do that more.

And even though we human attorneys can look people in the eyes, we still have rules to make sure we tell the truth.

Apart from Rule 4.1, another famous one (out of a different rule book) is Rule 11. You’d be surprised at how many rule books there actually are.

For non-lawyers, Rule 11 means that I get in big trouble if the words I say to a court are wrong and I don’t fix them (regardless of if I wrote them, or my word robot did).

Some (New York) attorneys already graciously served as examples for the application of this rule, and have been “sanctioned” for relying on their word robot’s wrong answer.

“Sanction” – a delightfully hypocritical word. In this case, it’s the bad definition.

And that makes sense, because a major goal of the court system is to accurately inform people, so they can make the best decision, regardless of the source of the accurate information.

In the end, I am still grateful to my robots.

One helped me create a website in short work, with little to no experience.

One helped me with my logo.

One keeps me more informed, educated, and on my writing toes (at a fraction the cost of traditional education).

And another has helped eliminate a substantial amount of traditional law firm overhead – because I guess private law firm book libraries were a big thing before robots.

What I hope that means is that quality legal advice becomes more affordable, more informed, for more people.

Both in person, and in text.

The post Thoughts on generative AI in the legal profession appeared first on Wasatch GC.

The Purpose of this Legal Journal

Danny Barber — Thu, 30 Nov 2023 07:00:11 +0000

Entry #1 - Hello World.

November 30, 2023

Welcome to my journal, glad you are here. This first entry offers you a guide into what I am trying to accomplish.

Overall, I am creating this journal to write about topics I’m interested in, to discuss how I think about things as an attorney, and in order to reconnect electronically with the many people I no longer get to interact with on a daily basis (but still have much to learn from).

I’ve learned a lot about the practice of law by simply having normal conversations with normal people, and want to actively cultivate more of those.

Based on my experience so far, I think a persistent theme of these entries will be that our modern life is full of complications arising from competing considerations (and alliterations). Often there is no certainty that any one decision is entirely correct, but one needs to be made regardless.

I will also do my best to intermix art and photography that I reflect with for each entry, which I believe helps humanize complex decisions.

Don’t worry, this journal is not strictly legal in nature. While I have no choice but to write with the voice of a patent attorney (yes, I am the one writing these, not my GPT), I will do my best to make my entries interesting, accessible, and not too long.

In any event, I hope you continue to read, and you find at least some of these entries helpful in your own pursuits. I will try to author one every week or so, no promises, it depends on how much real work I have to do.

…and yes, I welcome (preferably constructive) commentary about any of my entries, as well as questions readers want me to investigate privately on their behalf.

However, I cannot guarantee that I will have the relevant skills to provide meaningful responses (which is a requirement of my profession). But I will do my best to help where I can, or connect you with someone who would be able to.

The post The Purpose of this Legal Journal appeared first on Wasatch GC.

Thoughts On Advertising My Law Practice

Danny Barber — Thu, 30 Nov 2023 07:00:00 +0000

Entry #2 - Warning! An "Attorney Advertising"

November 30, 2023

This journal is an advertisement for my law practice (if that wasn’t obvious).

I hope it works.

I also hope it demonstrates how strange advertising a law practice can be.

Put simply, advertising as an attorney is complicated…

…which is probably a good thing?

It turns out, “ambulance chaser” jokes do well at parties. So do a lot of other attorney jokes.

I think the reason why is pretty obvious, we all have an understanding of how a “good attorney” should act, and it is funny when one doesn’t act the way we think they should. (“Things are always looking up for Ol Gil!” – The Simpsons).

What most non-laywers don’t realize is that we attorneys, as an entire profession, have imposed rules upon ourselves that reflect the ways we think “good attorneys” should act. That way, no more new jokes get made.

So it should be no surprise that there are some good rules governing how we as attorneys can advertise ourselves (you know, because of “ambulance chasers”).

After all, shouldn’t lawyers be more interested in genuinely helping people, rather than just monetizing their misfortune?

The first and most obvious rule governing how I can advertise is that I cannot make “a false or misleading communication” about who I am, what I am capable of doing, and what I have achieved. Makes sense right?

Second, any advertisement I make must not use an actor to portray myself, a client, or depict fictionalized events, unless I tell you about it (this one won’t).

I also have to tell you where the ad came from, and how to contact the firm who paid for it (this one came from me, you can contact me on this site).

Last, while it is difficult to tell you exactly how much any one particular project will cost, if I do it in an advertisement, I have to describe “all relevant charges”, which completely depends on the specifics of your situation, and is why no one does it.

These all make sense for advertisements…

But what about if I just go out and talk to people I think I could help?

Yes, there are rules about that too.

Recently, I took my first business trip on behalf of my new law practice.

I went to the 2023 meeting of the Society for Neurosciences, which consists of a collection of varied people who are really interested in figuring out how our brains work.

There are also some people trying to monetize that understanding, which is more difficult than you’d think.

One other benefit was that this convention happened to be in Washington D.C., a city that is often associated (though not always) with some very “good attorneys.”

It also made sense for my background. I have been learning about neuroscience for a while now (15 years), and I’ve worked in the industry for almost just as long.

You would think I should just go talk to people with shared interests at this convention, tell them about myself and my skills, and perhaps I would be able to help them.

But how is that really any different than being an “ambulance chaser?”

As lawyers, we have decided that “it’s complicated.” In Utah, we have agreed not to “solicit professional employment” in person with the “significant motive of obtaining monetary gain”, unless it is from:

Another lawyer,
A family member,
Or someone we already have a close personal or professional relationship with.

So how exactly am I supposed to go advertise myself to the (mostly) strangers at the brain conference?

A good friend helped me with the answer:

it’s not about me, it’s about them.

I should be going to this convention to reconnect with close personal and professional contacts that are also attending. It’s important to still talk with people who you already know and learn about their new challenges.

I should also be going to this conference to learn about my industry, and to challenge myself scientifically by listening to what other people have to say.

In fact, as a “Registered Patent Attorney”, I am ethically obligated to posses “the scientific and technical training necessary to provide valuable service to patent applicants.” (Yes, another rule.)

This makes my “significant motive” not about me or money, but about how my industry is progressing, what new science has come out, what people are worried about, and how I can genuinely help them.

I think that makes sense to anyone in advertising…And it’s actually a pretty a good way to bypass the awkwardness of networking.

In the end, the hard part about creating this journal is that I must be “truthful in statements to others” (Rule 4.1, rules will be a theme), but sometimes the truth is complicated.

It’s also hard to write because I used to read other people’s emails for a living…

Ultimately, there is no rule against you contacting me if you think I can help you understand a complex problem better. But until you do, and we both agree it makes sense, I am not your attorney, and this entire journal is not legal advice directed specifically at you.

I’m just thinking out loud, so you can read about how I think about being a “good attorney” for myself.

The post Thoughts On Advertising My Law Practice appeared first on Wasatch GC.