Shocking, LexisNexis is over 200 years old and is designed specifically for 
legal purposes. ChatGPT is less than a year old and isn’t designed (yet) for 
the legal profession.

Good choice picking the LexisNexis one.


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone


On Wednesday, September 6, 2023, 8:48 AM, Dean Kent <[email protected]> wrote:

Which brings up another 'interesting' anecdote.   I used chatGPT to 
'write' a set of bylaws for a new non-profit for a youth sports club.   
I asked it over a dozen times with different wording, and it came back 
with a wide variety of results - some that were long and included many 
sections, and others that were short and included only what might be 
considered 'necessary' sections.    I have a friend who is an attorney, 
and he sent me the template that LexisNexis provides.   It had a lot 
more content, some which the IRS now indicates is 'preferred' or even 
required.    So I ended up using the template since I could just remove 
or ignore sections that weren't pertinent.   The template also had a 
variety of options (variables, if you will) for wording depending on, 
for example, if the corporation has a CEO or President and whether board 
officers can also be corporate executives, etc.

That caused me to make the decision that I would not consider using 
chatGPT for creating legal documents.   Again, YMMV.

On 9/5/2023 12:27 PM, Steve Thompson wrote:
> And so we can now understand that when a paralegal or newly minted 
> attorney uses it to find case law for points and authorities, it will 
> will make them up to match what was being searched for when it 
> prepares a motion it was asked for using the results of the search.
>
> And some attorneys got a judge quite angry with them when they didn't 
> tell the court this, but the opposing council pointed out they could 
> not find any such case listed in the pleadings/motion. Then the 
> judge's people also could not find same.... This is the kind of thing 
> that concerns me about AI today. Once it has been taught enough to 
> learn on its own....
>
> Steve Thompson
>
> On 9/5/2023 12:46 PM, Dean Kent wrote:
>> I spent a bit of time playing with chatGPT to see what it could do.   
>> So did my two sons - one an MS in biotech, the other a PhD in 
>> theoretical physics.    We all came to the same conclusion - chatGPT 
>> is a very, very good Google search that can filter many different 
>> possible 'answers' and come to one that is 'most likely' based on 
>> various factors.  It has little to no creativity or understanding of 
>> what it is asked to do.   Not surprising, but different than what the 
>> popular press seems to say about it.
>>
>> One of my questions was to write a simple sort routine in HLASM. It 
>> came back with a template containing the entry/exit code, and then a 
>> comment *insert sort routine here*.    After doing that with many 
>> different simple tasks, I came to the conclusion that the problem 
>> chatGPT has with assembler (but not with C, Python, Java, etc.) is 
>> that there are so few searchable examples of code in assembler.    So 
>> the quality of the results, for any question, depends upon what 
>> exists out on the Internet.   Again, not surprising.
>>
>> As another example, I have an interest in what is called 'historical 
>> analysis'.   There are a number of books on the subject, so I asked 
>> chatGPT to compare/contrast two of the books.   Then two other books, 
>> etc.    In literally every case it came back with the same 
>> introductory text and conclusion - but inserted a couple of 
>> paragraphs that was similar to a book review for each book and 
>> compared the 'differences'.   Not very impressed.
>>
>> My PhD son uses it to find obscure hypotheses and formulas that would 
>> otherwise require a great many hours (or days) of searching.   My MS 
>> son uses it in a similar fashion to ferret out alternative options 
>> for the various cell growing and protein extraction for his job.   A 
>> very useful tool, but not yet SkyNet...
>>
>> YMMV.
>>
>> On 9/5/2023 9:36 AM, Bill Johnson wrote:
>>> We are all retired. The other 2 went before me. I went in July 2022. 
>>> You’re an idiot regardless. What are you afraid of? That a computer 
>>> can do what you do? That your “skills” aren’t all that impressive 
>>> and can be automated away?
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, September 5, 2023, 12:25 PM, David Spiegel 
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Bill,
>>> I have a better idea.
>>> Why don't you and the 2 buddies who helped you modify the IEFUSI fix 
>>> it?
>>> Probably because you don't have the wherewithal (even with 2 helpers).
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> David
>>>
>>> On 2023-09-05 12:04, Bill Johnson wrote:
>>>> Lol, how about going to chatgpt and asking the same question. So 
>>>> that cut and paste isn’t a factor.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, September 5, 2023, 12:02 PM, David Spiegel 
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Steve,
>>>> It won't. The first executable statement is missing a comma between
>>>> operands.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> David
>>>>
>>>> On 2023-09-05 11:43, Steve Thompson wrote:
>>>>> I doubt it will assemble. And even if it does, the results are
>>>>> unpredictable, other than it will probably ABEND for one reason or
>>>>> another.
>>>>>
>>>>> There are no DCB, OPEN, CLOSE macros while GET and PUT are being 
>>>>> used.
>>>>>
>>>>> Me thinks this AI system is confusing a few different assembly
>>>>> languages together. I wonder how close they came for DOS I/O.
>>>>> Steve Thompson
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9/5/2023 11:20 AM, Tom Marchant wrote:
>>>>>> You're right, Tom. That is not a program. Certainly not one that 
>>>>>> will
>>>>>> do what it claims to do.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- Tom Marchant On Mon, 4 Sep 2023 10:42:51 -0700, Tom Brennan
>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> I can't be sure I formatted it properly, but after looking over the
>>>>>>> code, I have nothing to say but WTF? 😄
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>              PRINT NOGEN
>>>>>>>              TITLE 'Simple Addition Program'
>>>>>>> ** Define storage for input numbers and result
>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>> NUM1     DS    F             First input number
>>>>>>> NUM2     DS    F             Second input number
>>>>>>> RESULT   DS    F             Result of addition
>>>>>>> ** Main program
>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>> MAIN     C      0        NUM1   Check if NUM1 is zero
>>>>>>>              BE     ZERO            Branch to ZERO if true
>>>>>>> ** Read the first number from input
>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>              GET    NUM1,NUMIN      Read NUM1 from input
>>>>>>>              LA     0,NUM1          Load NUM1 into register
>>>>>>> ** Read the second number from input
>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>              GET    NUM2,NUMIN      Read NUM2 from input
>>>>>>>              A      NUM1,NUM2       Add NUM1 and NUM2
>>>>>>>              ST     NUM1,RESULT     Store the result in RESULT
>>>>>>> ** Print the result
>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>              PUT    RESULT,NUMOUT   Print the result
>>>>>>> ** Terminate the program
>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>              SR     15,15           Set return code to 0
>>>>>>>              BR     14              Return to caller
>>>>>>> ** Define input and output areas
>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>> NUMIN    DC    F'0'           Input buffer for numbers
>>>>>>> NUMOUT   DC    F'0'           Output buffer for result
>>>>>>> ZERO     DC    F'0'           Constant zero
>>>>>>>              END   MAIN            End of program
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>>>>>> send email [email protected]  with the message: INFO 
>>>>>> IBM-MAIN
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>>>>>
>>>>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>>>>> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO 
>>>>> IBM-MAIN
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>>>> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>>>> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>>> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>>> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN




----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to