Become a Creator today!Start creating today - Share your story with the world!
Start for free
00:00:00
00:00:01
Is This an Image of an Elven Woman Smoking a Vape Pen?
73 Plays1 year ago
- Logic Games dropped from the LSAT
- This new data poisoning tool lets artists fight back against generative AI | MIT Technology Review
- X, formerly Twitter, tests charging new users $1 a year to use basic features - CBS News
- Proposed advisory opinion on Lawyers’ and Law Firms’ Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence – The Florida Bar
- Corbin Carroll is one of the fastest baseball players ever and can cover 30.4 feet in a second (thanks Micah!)
Recommended
Transcript
The Role of Intro Music in Podcasts
00:00:00
Speaker
Good evening fellers. Good evening. Where's the intro music? We didn't sell on anything. Oh, that's good. Can we go with that? Can we use that? I came up with a rhyme and y'all ignored me. Go. I'm sorry. Yeah, I should have. We should have put it in the AI music generator that you sent to us. Yeah. It was like the biggest brain. I was going to have the fake
00:00:24
Speaker
Katy Perry saying the best brains you ever will ever will find we're the aspiring minds or something like that. That's good. I like that. Okay, maybe next week, maybe by next week, we will finally have something I did. I think I did something to the happy birthday thing. It was terrible.
00:00:40
Speaker
You can't understand the problem with a lot of these. From what I could tell is it's very difficult. What we're talking about is like these music generating things where it's basically text to song, right? Like text to speech, but text to music. So you can type in like the prompt is the lyrics you want the horrible AI to generate something sounding like the human voice singing. But it's very difficult to make out what they're actually saying. So it wasn't particularly funny. I'm hoping that improves maybe between now and next week. Yeah.
00:01:09
Speaker
So the remaining is getting dramatically better like constantly so that is yeah good the original well good for that. The original theme music for the show for anybody who's actually like stuck around and listen to this after.
00:01:24
Speaker
any of it was like, I think it was done with an AI music generator that was prompted with Supreme Court barbecue. Is that right, Jake? Yes. Yeah. And so that gave us the monstrosity that we had for the first few, I don't know, 20 episodes maybe. And then we just kind of stopped doing it because it is unappealing. Unappealing. Is that right? Yeah. Nobody needs music. That's the secret thing about
00:01:50
Speaker
Podcasts is that intro music the youtubers have discovered this I don't know if you've noticed this but youtubers have stopped using their intro of it intros like they'll create like a nice 3d animated intro with like a music stinger and they've stopped using it because people just skip it They they clicked they know what they're watching So people they stopped using it so you don't actually need any of that
00:02:13
Speaker
That's true. What is it
Skeuomorphism in Digital Interfaces
00:02:14
Speaker
called? Skeuomorphism, where basically what you have is YouTubers are emulating what it was like to be on television because that's all they know. It's sort of like the early version. I don't know if you remember the first version of the Notes app in iOS.
00:02:30
Speaker
phone OS, I think it was called at that point. But it was like a yellow legal pad with a leather desk mat or something like that. Yeah, it made no sense. It was tempting to sort of like make an analogy to the physical desktop or the physical notepad or whatever. But on top of it, when you wrote words, it didn't stay on the lines. It just ignored the lines as though it was like a background on a bad webpage in like 1996.
00:02:52
Speaker
Here's the thing though, everything about a computer is skeuomorphism. It hasn't always been, but everything about a computer these days with a graphical user interface is skeuomorphism. The desktop is a skeuomorphic version of
00:03:05
Speaker
your desktop, literally the top of your desk that your computer is sitting on.
Introductions and Casual Conversations
00:03:09
Speaker
Your computer is organized into folders and files like you would have in a filing cabinet. Even though much of that is biological because we have pattern seeking brains that have been trained on patterns through evolution, through
00:03:26
Speaker
hundreds of thousands of years to seek the same types of patterns this is now a philosophy podcast yeah or whatever that would be called so we want to be a funny bit if every time somebody is saying something that i want to change the subject on i just make our old the music.
00:03:47
Speaker
Let's hear how well you mimic that little theme music. We haven't said our names yet, by the way. We gotta remember to do it. Well, let's do the theme music from Jason and then we'll do our names.
00:03:58
Speaker
I'm sorry, I'm too sickly to do theme music. I have a non-COVID respiratory infection. Just wait. I'll bust it out at a time when I'm not feeling chest jittery. So who are you? Dear host. Me? Yeah, you. OK. So well, we are all squaring minds. This is episode 27 for October 26, 2023. And I'm Andrew Leahy, a taxi technology attorney from New Jersey.
00:04:19
Speaker
Uh, it's just three lure friends goofing around for own enjoyment. Nothing we say is legal advice because we're not qualified to give advice on most of the things we talk about. I'm joined as always by, I'm going to go with the healthy one this time. Jake, he's the healthy one. Okay. The healthy one. Yeah. Uh, we were sick last week. I think that was
Memorable Podcast Theme Music
00:04:40
Speaker
how it went. No.
00:04:42
Speaker
Not even close. No, not even close. Oh, no. That was like a Supreme Court, like all you can eat buffet or salad. It was closer to yakety sacks. Okay. Uh, I will say there was a, like when I listened to my bim bam, which Andrew and I both listened to, I don't know if you ever listened to that, Jason, my brother, my brother and me, my brother, my brother and me. Um,
00:05:04
Speaker
Like they still do. Actually, I like both of their theme musics, but they had theme music. Fantastic. Yeah. And it was once a week. It was a fun ritual to hear that theme music. So the lesson I take from that is if you're going to have theme music, make it good so that people are excited to hear it. Yeah. By the way, I'm an attorney, ladies, and construction. I'm a musician.
00:05:27
Speaker
Yes. And I am Jason Ramesland. I sue people's bad bosses. I do that mainly in Indiana. Occasionally I venture out in other places. Uh, but you can find me at sue my bad boss.com.
00:05:38
Speaker
You had a few year venture out. You had a year of venture out, uh, dalliance of a few years in Georgia. Yeah. Yeah. You're wearing a Georgia shirt right now. I am. This is an audio format. That's not helpful for our listeners,
College Names and Trivia
00:05:50
Speaker
but I just wanted to sort of, you know, theater of the mind, let them, let them know what they would be seeing if they could see it. It becomes a visual format when you describe what you're seeing. Yes. I am wearing a Georgia bulldogs t-shirt because there's nobody in Indiana who's any good at football. Yes. I'm including Notre Dame.
00:06:06
Speaker
Yeah. Oh gosh. The most perennially overrated football team in college football for the past. I get it. Since I was born, they've been overrated. It's crazy. Notre Dame is in Indiana? Yeah. Since I've been to Indiana. How did you not know that? I thought it was like North Dakota. No, this is like when I forget where like Drexel, oh wait, I should remember Drexel now, right? Thanks a lot.
00:06:32
Speaker
That's the name you pulled out. Just let me think of something at random. I saw you look around the room trying to come up with something like Drexel. I don't know where that is. Is Drexel a professor? It's how I forget where Gonzaga is. I know it's in California. I think it's in California. Gonzaga's in Washington. I have no idea where that is. See? Here we go. I forget where all these places are because they don't have a geographic association with their name.
00:06:57
Speaker
You're confusing colleges to be like University of, and then the state name, right? That's what you're advocating for. So yeah. Yeah. All right. Yeah. My favorite state is Ball State, actually. I love Ball.
00:07:08
Speaker
Sure. The Cardinals. I love Morgan, the state of Morgan. Yeah. Yeah. Kent, right. Some of my favorite states. Yeah. Yeah. OK. Oh, I see. I see the joke for yes. OK. It doesn't make any sense why they say state. It's sort of like a lot of times hospitals will be called like just Memorial Hospital. Memorial to what? Right.
00:07:28
Speaker
Well, I, I used to be
Creating a D&D Campaign
00:07:30
Speaker
like, I used to think it was such a clever joke when I was like a teenager, like, Oh yeah. What state? Oh, I've never heard of that state. And I was like, Oh, there's a state college is a thing that means publicly funded. Oh, I under it's a category. Uh, yeah. There was a town in Pennsylvania called state college, Pennsylvania. Oh yeah. They stole my college. They stole my coach. They stole James Franklin from Vanderbilt.
00:07:56
Speaker
Vanderbilt had three good football years and they were the three years that James Franklin was there. And now he, and he went to Penn state, uh, understandably, I was honestly, I was sad, but not mad that he left. Cause I was like, man, this makes perfect sense. But, uh, but yeah, it sucks. We just have that with Purdue too, where, uh, Jeff Brom, who like didn't make Purdue especially good, but you know, they had a couple of good years and now they suck again because Jeff Brom went to Louisville.
Origins of the Podcast
00:08:25
Speaker
Didn't Purdue just get accredited to do an online only law school? I don't know. I hope not. I think so. I think they're trying to make a go of it. It's a terrible idea. Speaking of fear of the mind and harkening back to one of our most successful episodes, I've started creating a D&D campaign with some friends. I'm going to run this one, which is something I've never done, but it's a lot of fun like generating like a
00:08:54
Speaker
Working from the basics and also I'm using I'm I paid Wizards of the coast for this I'm a terrible terrible activist. I paid them the money for their for their books So your boycott ended after like 13 episodes and four months or whatever. Yeah, really I wasn't but I was never boycotting but yeah, I was I was angry on the behalf of other people and
00:09:17
Speaker
Uh, but then I was like, uh, actually, but then Baldur's gate came out and I was like, Oh, this is training me. So, um, so it sort of like, got you, uh, wet your feet back into the, the original recipe. Yeah. It got me, uh, well, it trained me on the extremely complex rule set. I didn't understand. And so over a hundred something hours of playing that game, hasn't it only been out for like a month and a half or something?
00:09:43
Speaker
Uh, it's been out since September 9th or something. Oh, okay. That's reasonable. Yeah. Have you been playing? Is it reasonable? It doesn't have to be reasonable. That's okay. No, it's probably not. But I mean, what you do with your time is your own business. Yeah. How do you, so is your, is
The LSAT Logic Games Debate
00:10:00
Speaker
your D and D group, uh, a group of players that were already playing and you are joining them or like, are you the most, uh,
00:10:10
Speaker
I am not the most experienced at all. But running a campaign takes a long time. And so you got to commit to it. And I wanted to do it for some reason, which is stupid. Yeah, there aren't enough demands on your time already, right? So you should just take up another.
00:10:28
Speaker
Yeah, because volunteers for too much stuff is my jam. Lawyers famously have nothing but time on their hands. Yeah. I volunteered to do this podcast for some reason. I don't know. Wasn't it your idea? I think it was your idea, yeah, actually. I don't know if you volunteered. I think we volunteered or we got roped in or something. Yeah, I was like, we've been talking a lot.
00:10:50
Speaker
And I was just like, you know, should we just do a podcast? And it was like, yeah, yeah, we probably should. I'm not the first one to make this joke on this podcast, but, uh, three white guys who are friends, but over a long distance, like what else would you do but have a podcast? I think it's what you call three white guys in a group, like a murder of crows or a podcast of white men.
00:11:09
Speaker
It's how you refer to them as a group. It's outstanding. Outstanding. I love it. Like Wales, but different. Right. Exactly. Like Wales. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So you want to talk about some topics, some mini topics, some major topics. The mini topics are the first one. Let's talk about D&D. Well, I mean, we got to talk about sports at some point because we have to lament the state of baseball and I'm sure you guys have thoughts on football, but we usually do that at the end of the show. Baseball's never been better. Let's do law topics and then we can talk about stuff that we actually care about.
00:11:38
Speaker
Sounds good. So logic games gone from the LSAT. What do we think?
00:11:44
Speaker
I guess I should introduce it better for people who don't know. So the LSAT is the test you need to take to get to law school. You used to have to take it. My understanding is that you don't necessarily have to take it anymore. Yeah, a lot of schools don't require it anymore. You can take the GRE. I think there has to be some sort of standardized test that you take. I don't think any law school can just say, we'll accept anyone with a decent GPA. You have to take something. But my understanding is it's at least the GRE. And it might also be the GMAT, the business school, the MBA exam in some schools is acceptable.
00:12:13
Speaker
But to the extent the LSAT is still the test people are taking, they're dropping the logic games section from it.
00:12:22
Speaker
which when I'm sure it was the same when you guys took it, there were two LR sections, which are like logical reasoning sections. And then there was one logic game section, LG, and then there was a reading comprehension section. And then there was some sort of experimental section, which I didn't know. The only way you would know what it was was, I guess you would never know what the experimental section was until afterwards, right? You'd get the third LR and you'd go, oh, my experiment. Yeah, exactly. You get the last section and it's like, you know, well for me, I knew,
00:12:51
Speaker
I got this is going to play into my reaction to this to the dropping of the logic games, but I got my experimental section was logic games. And the thing is, you know that the experimental section is never first or last.
00:13:08
Speaker
So I had a logic game section as my second section and I got minus zero. I was like, I know all these. I've got them figured out. And that was the thing about logic games is that it was such weird reasoning. It was like,
00:13:25
Speaker
It's the puzzles where it's like, this person can't sit next to this person, but this person can sit only next to Bob and that kind of stuff. There are 10 seats. Mary will never sit on either of the ends, and she won't sit next to anyone who's wearing a hat. Bob's wearing a hat, and he's saying, right, that kind of whole thing, yeah. The chicken and the fox taking the road across the water.
00:13:45
Speaker
The funny thing is, so reading comprehension and logical reasoning are never like, you're never a hundred percent, right? Or like you can be, you can be like, oh yeah, that's the right answer. But like logic games, you can be like, yes, this is a hundred percent the answer and be fully confident in your answer and not worried about it. Oh, I disagree. So my experience was the exact opposite. There's something after I studied for the LSAT,
00:14:13
Speaker
LR at for whatever reason I cannot explain this um Developed a certain sort of cadence for me that I would know At least two of the three of the four answers were absolutely incorrect, but I couldn't put two words right, right?
00:14:28
Speaker
And then I really couldn't. Like if you asked me, well, why is that incorrect? Because I did some tutoring for LSAT, too. And I tried to teach people. They just feel wrong. They just feel right. Well, it can't be that, because come on. It's not A. Let's go. Yeah. And move on to B. So LR, I was ultimately, when I took the LSAT, I didn't get anything wrong in any of the LR sections. I didn't get anything wrong in any of the reading comprehension sections. And I don't think I got anything right in the logic games. I think I got them all wrong. I think I got 100% of them wrong. That's funny.
00:14:56
Speaker
Meanwhile, everybody always tells you logic games are the most learnable thing, which was just like, drove me insane. Because if it's the most learnable, why can't I learn it? But sorry, the way you felt about LG, that's how I felt about LR. That's funny because like, yeah, I follow that main, the main line of thinking of it's the most learnable because I started out not knowing, not getting any of the logic games right. But then the when I took the LSAT,
00:15:22
Speaker
I had, my second section was logic games and I aced it. I knew I aced it. I knew I got minus zero because I had learned it. I had successfully learned it. Uh, and then I turned to the fifth section and it's logic games again and I'm like, God dang it. Oh, that means my minus zero was useless to me. I'm not getting scored on that.
00:15:41
Speaker
And wouldn't you know it, that was my worst section because I misread a prompt and I didn't have time to go back and fix everything. The final section was your worst? The final section was my worst section, the second logic game section. Gotcha. Yeah. But that plays into my overall thought on it, which is like, if you
Bar Exam Experiences and Legal Education
00:16:05
Speaker
had asked me about logic games before I took it about why it was useful at all,
00:16:10
Speaker
Um, I would have said logic games doesn't make any sense. Why, when are you ever going to use this? This is such so strange. Like I wouldn't have thought I will say having as a, uh, I think that it probably is a good section. I think that they should have kept it because I think the test of, of whether or not it's so hard to test legal reasoning. Um, and I think that the strongest test for legal reasoning, I've told this to all the, to a bunch of kids that I interviewed to
00:16:40
Speaker
who are interested in going to Vandy is your ability to play collectible card games. Because in these like Magic the Gathering and and Pokemon and Hearthstone and that kind of thing. Because these collectible card games are, here's a word. We're going to give you the simplest possible explanation of what this word means. And the word is like haste or something like that. Charge.
00:17:09
Speaker
And then you have to figure out how it interacts with all these other rules and then apply that to a bunch of numbers. And so that is very similar. That is to me, the most similar thing you can get to actually practicing law. I mean, it sounds like what you're describing is min maxing as an as a way of like figuring out who's got legal aptitude is like who is good at min maxing on spreadsheets for world of Warcraft or something.
00:17:39
Speaker
Right. Well, I'm thinking that similar in certain ways. Yeah. Well, it wasn't what I was going for though, which is that your ability to turn a word into a, a concept that you can move around in your brain is I think a very difficult thing to test for. And I think logic games is the closest thing you can do to that.
00:18:01
Speaker
It's not a hundred percent of what lawyers do, but it's a skill that lawyers have better. You are at that. The better you are reasoning. I don't really have that strong of feelings about logic games and whether they were good at testing that, but I don't know. I can see the logic there. Do you think that the use of logic games as a gatekeeping mechanism for people getting into lawyers is why we have such a high preponderance of antisocial dysfunctional lawyers?
00:18:27
Speaker
No, I don't think we have enough antisocial lawyers, honestly. Well, I'm the bubble bursar on that because I think certainly on this podcast, I'm probably the most antisocial and dysfunctional of us and I didn't do very well on logic games, so that doesn't hold. So maybe that's not gatekeeping in that way. I'm sitting over here and honestly, I think it's been 20 years since I took the LSAT. I could not tell you anything about
00:18:53
Speaker
anything about that except for interesting little tie-in from earlier. I took the LSAT at Ball State. But it was 2003. It was 20 years ago when I took the LSAT. It's not as long for you guys, but I have no idea how you remember any of this stuff.
00:19:11
Speaker
Well, I don't remember the order birds, birds in the forest. No classic, a classic one. Anyway, I loosely, I loosely remember the room in which I sat to take the LSAT. Oh, I got nothing. No, I don't remember. I mean, I don't remember. The only thing I remember is stuff that has to do with the test. Like, for instance, you know, the rules they go through where, you know, you will, you cannot get up until the, it is done. If you get up, you forfeit your attempt at the exam, all that stuff, all your stuff in a Ziploc bag, whatever.
00:19:38
Speaker
About 10 minutes in, the guy behind me gets up, gets on the floor and starts doing push-ups.
00:19:44
Speaker
to get like a putt or something, yeah. Nothing happens to him. He goes back to doing his test. Then he gets up and he leaves the building, goes out into a courtyard that we can all see from where we're testing, and does sit-ups on a park bench, on a park bench, I'm sorry, like a picnic table out in the area there. Proctor sees none of this. The guy finished the test. Nothing ever happened to him. I'm sure I'm pretty certain based on the grunts and screams he was doing as he was attempting to take the test, he didn't ace it.
00:20:12
Speaker
He was allowed to finish. I mean, unless the maybe the I don't understand that the Proctor's just flagged the exam is like, it doesn't matter what you do now. Oh, yeah. Maybe I do know they do that. Oh, okay. Well, then maybe I do know they they flagged people and just let them know afterwards that they that they were busted. Oh, so that they don't disrupt everybody else taking the test.
00:20:32
Speaker
That's maybe what happened, but I've been telling that story forever of just the insanity of him. I can still see him crystal clear. He's wearing a bright red shirt. He's out in the incredibly bright sun just outside this little conference room we're all sitting in. There's a whole wall of windows and he's doing jumping pins out there with the pencil behind his ear that he will come back in and continue taking his exam with.
00:20:52
Speaker
Have I mentioned my bar exam story of in Florida? This was the 2014 bar exam somebody Somebody started screaming about how they can't do this to us or something like that The thing is I couldn't hear it because that auditorium had about like a thousand two thousand students in it and I was like
00:21:14
Speaker
a quarter of the room away from me and it was still too far away from me to make out anything that she was saying. Y'all were probably allowed to use computers at that point, right? Yes. Yes. I think I might've been one of the very last classes that had to do the bar exam in all blue books.
00:21:30
Speaker
So I had to do the, not the MBE, is it the MBE? Yeah, the MBE was in Blue Book, but then you could do the essay section for New Jersey at home later. Like, it had to be submitted at the end of that day. Yeah, it was, it was exam four. It was open book, it was exam four. I remember, so we took the, I think I've told this story. We took the, it was the year that the Democratic National Convention was in Philadelphia. And so ordinarily the Pennsylvania Bar Exam would be in Philly, but the convention center was taken up.
00:21:59
Speaker
So we booked an Airbnb for where it was going to be in York, which is like, I don't know, four hours outside of Philly. Like it's a long way out in Western Pennsylvania. And our plan was we're going to go there, do two days of that, and then we'd have to drive back on the
AI Image Generation and Data Poisoning
00:22:15
Speaker
third day to Atlantic City, New Jersey to, I don't know why I said New Jersey as though you don't know where that is, to Atlantic City to take the New Jersey bar. Our Airbnb fell through
00:22:23
Speaker
So we had to drive the morning of both of those two days from New Jersey to Pennsylvania to take the bar like four and a half hours or something. And then on the third day, drive back and go directly to Atlantic city, to the convention center, to take the New Jersey bar, which was not enjoyable. Yeah. Talk about a gauntlet, man. That's terrible.
00:22:45
Speaker
Yeah, everybody passed. So logic games are dropped from the LSAT. Jake thinks that's a tragedy. I kind of just don't care because I've blacked it all out. I don't remember much of anything of it. I do remember sitting around in like the student union working on those practice LSAT books. This was before they might've come with CD-ROMs at that point. And you would use those to do like little mini tests, but
00:23:10
Speaker
Uh, like I don't remember anything about the actual exam itself. It was, it's so long ago. So change it. Don't change it. I don't care. I don't really care. It isn't, it is. There've been a lot of changes to law school, like philosophy that we're kind of percolating when I went. Yeah. You know, LSAT being less important, LSAT non-management, LSAT changing. Um,
00:23:36
Speaker
not participating in the U.S. U.S. News World Rankings. Yeah, that's big. Everything when I went just like a lot of like kind of a lot of the things that had solidified or calcified where this is the way it's done. You do the LSAT, the LSAT consists of this. It's the school only cares about juicing the numbers for the U.S. News rankings. Yeah. And it's like that's the that was the way that it was.
00:24:06
Speaker
I'm not gonna, I don't really don't have a strong opinion on whether it's better or worse, having that moving away from it. I don't mourn the loss of any of that crap. The decalcification of, you know, all of these processes and like the fact that I remember you had to like buy a special edition of US News and World Report to get those rankings back then. And like they had them broken down in
00:24:34
Speaker
in like a hierarchical form, like here's school that's ranked number 17 and it has this median GPA and this median LSAT. All of that can just die a swift death and go away. The fact that we're moving away from something that was very entrenched like that is great. I think lawyers need to get very good at moving away from things that are entrenched.
00:24:59
Speaker
like comes now the plaintiff by counsel and yada yada yada all stupid crap like that we need to get rid of it all to to your point on that the the reason why i have you know i obviously have personal animosity against clg section and i'm glad it's gone but in addition to that when i read the
Legal Implications of AI in Law
00:25:15
Speaker
reasoning for it it made perfect sense and it's sort of um a
00:25:18
Speaker
show of privilege that I never had to consider it, it's apparently very difficult to make an LG section that enables the same potential for blind test takers as sighted test takers. That's true.
00:25:33
Speaker
make it, you know, technically doable. But the idea of like diagramming and all of that, apparently is it's almost impossible to make it actually on par where like, you know, a blind person would come or an unsighted person would come away saying, Oh, that was exactly as easy as it would be. I don't imagine I was at a handicap here at all. So once I read that, I went, Oh, of course, right. All the other sections are much more doable. Yeah, it's not accessible at all, really. Yeah.
00:25:58
Speaker
All right, so we don't mourn. Not mourning. I reflect on it as a passage of time from a historical perspective, as a history guy that I am. It's an interesting historical move.
00:26:13
Speaker
Yeah, exactly. It'll be a weird little era where it does seem as though there were a lot of things that were, I mean, and this, I'm not saying this as a negative. There were a lot of things that were entrenched for, uh, from my perspective, I'm sure it's not true for older attorneys. They would say it's not the case, but from my perspective, these things were just, as, as I think Jake, you said how it is, right?
00:26:31
Speaker
It's always been this way. It has never changed. It's all the same. Like you might change how you take the LSAT. Like you need to take it in person or on a computer or whatever, but the test is exactly the same. The bar is exactly the same, right? There's a next gen bar. We talked about it, I don't know, three or four episodes ago coming out that I don't think any states have signed on for. Yeah. In fact, Florida, I believe reject like.
00:26:51
Speaker
strongly indicated that I was going to reject the new bar. I think because it had, yeah, it had some overtone, like it got politicized, right? No, it wasn't political. It was like, it was like, actually, this is not like, it wasn't based on any like, well, it's all, everything is always political, right? But it wasn't like, you know, I do a, this is diversity. And it wasn't anything like that as far as I know. Okay. It was just that like y'all haven't proved that this is better in any way.
00:27:21
Speaker
So I think that was kind of the takeaway. Yeah, but haven't we proved that the bar exam is bad? Forget about whether the new one is good. Don't we all understand that the old bar exam is bad? Forget whether it's actually an effective gatekeeper for keeping people who shouldn't be in the profession out of the profession.
00:27:45
Speaker
pretty well acknowledged by people who have actually done empirical studies on it that it disadvantages people of lower economic classes and different kind of normative learning, I don't know, styles.
00:28:03
Speaker
We can shove the whole bar exam as far as I'm concerned. If you can make it through three years at an accredited law school and pass the thing, then let's just all be Wisconsin. And if you graduate from law school, you're in. And some other states just added a thing where you can be barred through apprenticeship. I don't remember where that was. Either they actually got passed or they're going to. You've always been able to do that in California.
00:28:26
Speaker
Right. That's what that's what Kim Kardashian is doing at one point. Yeah, I don't know that it's hard. It's not it's not easy. Like it is hard.
00:28:37
Speaker
Uh, I think Delaware has like a hybrid thing, right? I think you have to pass the, you can't sit for the bar until you've like worked under a Delaware attorney for some amount of time. Cause I quite brief that there it's, it's a close enough state. And obviously a lot of corporations, you know, a lot of entities are formed in Delaware that I like looked into it. I think at some point to see if I wanted to get barred there. And it was something like you had to work under a Delaware barred attorney for like a year before you could sit for the bar, I think, or something. It was like a combination of the whole thing, which is, uh,
00:29:05
Speaker
Wisconsin has the non-bar admission if you go to the University of Wisconsin. I think you can go to Marquette too.
00:29:16
Speaker
Okay. It's like, is Marquette state college? No, but it's a private college in Milwaukee. Okay. It's just like, you got to be in a established law school in the state and then you get the diploma privilege. Yeah. I assume it's just like protectionist Homerism, but whatever. I wonder if you have to take that
Evolution of Legal Research Tools
00:29:35
Speaker
in Florida. No, nobody does that anywhere. There are definitely, well, I'm going to restrain myself here. I almost Donald Trump'd for a second.
00:29:44
Speaker
Whoa, you almost attacked a law clerk? What? No. It was stormed out. Which part of Donald Trump are you feeling that you might do right now? Well, now I don't want to say. I was going to start a beauty family podcast. Yeah. Oh no. That's a good idea, Jake. Start a beauty pageant.
00:30:00
Speaker
Yeah. All those gentlemen are above board mind individuals. There's nothing wrong with those people. I wonder if you, I want to say, I wonder if you have to take specific curriculum, uh, in the Wisconsin schools, you know, like, do you need to take something that is the equivalent of like a bar prep type thing? Like the one L year is like, so tracks the equivalent of a bar prep, right? It's like you do one L and then for Bri prep, you relearn all the one L stuff you learn.
00:30:30
Speaker
except with maybe state-specific stuff. Yeah, personally, so I went to a state school, I went to Rutgers, and personally, I probably learned more in the bar prep for Torts than I did in Torts itself, and the same is more or less true of CivPro and everything. There was no state-specific stuff.
00:30:45
Speaker
Which I mean, I imagine you can get rid of that one. But the other thing is like you're in Wisconsin. So it's not the same as being. Are there even any laws there? Yeah, I mean, right. It's just I say this. I love Wisconsin. I finished high school in Wisconsin. It's a great place. I love Wisconsin. So you W. Some of my best friends are from Wisconsin. There are good Wisconsinites on both sides. That is that is literally true. Some of my some of my good friends are from Wisconsin.
00:31:08
Speaker
They happen to be from Wisconsin. Oh my gosh. You're the worst. This is why it's hard to love you. I didn't do the voice. This is why it's hard to love you. I don't know what it is. It's Roy Kent from Ted Lasso. Come on. Apparently it's not a very good one.
00:31:27
Speaker
So UW curriculum, first semester is contracts, criminal law, criminal procedure, civil procedure, legal writing. That is exactly my first year. That's exactly my first year. Second semester is property, torts, cod law, and legal writing. Like, OK. Sounds familiar. All the same stuff. No crimpro at Rutgers, but otherwise the same. Yeah, no crimpro for me until.
00:31:49
Speaker
That's true. Like third year on purpose. I never took crim pro because I didn't need it because I knew for sure I wasn't going to be a criminal lawyer. And then two L and three L you get to explore the curriculum and take whatever the heck you want. Uh, so it is basically like any other law school. I think, I think I had to take a certain, uh, species of class in two L year. Like you had to either take trust in the States or family law or something like that. But like,
00:32:18
Speaker
It was on rails first year, second year, third year. And it seems like that's in Wisconsin too. So it's not that specialized. I'd be really interested in talking to somebody who's practiced in both Wisconsin and a state where they have the bar exam or where the bar exam is mandatory to see what the quality difference is. And if there's no quality difference, then that kind of proves that the bar exam isn't really necessary in that, or at least it can be substituted with diploma privilege.
00:32:46
Speaker
of a specific stratification of law schools. I would imagine the difference is negligible because just imagine your own law school, imagine the people in your class that did well, not just great, but take the top 50%. Did any of them, to your knowledge, fail the bar exam? Not for me. People who failed were about the people who I thought probably would fail. Oh, really? There was somebody who failed a bar exam who was
00:33:13
Speaker
I think they were top half. They seemed smart. They were just bad test takers. I can see that. Which is why it's stupid to have the bar exam as a gatekeeper if somebody can survive three years in law school and demonstrate sufficient aptitude and
Elon Musk's Twitter Fee Plan
00:33:30
Speaker
intelligence to do it. I'm pro diploma privilege as long as we're gatekeeping the quality of the instruction.
00:33:39
Speaker
I agree. So we've talked about intelligence. Now let's talk about artificial intelligence as a segue. What a segue plus plus hold on. It's going to be weird if I clap into the microphone. No, that's good. I mean, it's not any weirder than that voice you did before. So yeah, okay. Yeah. I'm in a weird mood tonight.
00:33:56
Speaker
I think Jake shared this, it's interesting, this article about data poisoning tools for AI ingesting like large language models and image generating generative AI ingesting other people's images and the ability to like poison the metaphorical well with your own images so that when an AI eats it up, it screws it up, screws up the whole model. Yeah, it like it inserts bad data that messes with the model into your works.
00:34:23
Speaker
which is, I think, great. I mean, like, great is the wrong word. It just, like, opens up another... Yeah, go ahead, Jason. So what I want to make sure that I understand here is this is not poisoning the entirety of the generative AI pool. This is poisoning a specific thing where, like, let's say I have a... What's the, like, website where you can get funky art by commissions deviant something?
World Series Excitement
00:34:50
Speaker
Is it deviant? Deviant art? Yeah, I think so.
00:34:52
Speaker
Let's say I have a bunch of stuff out there that I've done and
00:34:56
Speaker
I want to make sure that that's not getting ingested into that. So I put up on my storefront, what, like five or 10 of these poison pill images that then prevent my stuff from being misappropriated. Is that what's going on here? Or are we poisoning the entire well, the entire well, at least potentially for the prompts that would generate things that the AI learned from your image. So let's say you had a
00:35:26
Speaker
you
00:35:27
Speaker
art generate like a cartoon of a dog, right? That you drew or something. Yeah. Let's make it less weird. Let's not call it a deviant art. Let's call it Etsy. Let's say I got an Etsy storefront. Okay. That sounds much nicer. And you have some art on there and it's of something like an animal, something simple like that, like a dog, right? And AI ingest it and the model flags it or tags it rather as a dog. This is a picture of a dog. It is learning more about what dogs look like based on this is intended to be an image of a dog.
00:35:58
Speaker
What it ingests and gets tagged as dog includes your poison pill and thus it is at least possible that in future requests where a prompt is submitted for the term dog, it will spit out a picture of a cat or something else because you have screwed up the AI's ability to know what dog is. Does that make sense?
00:36:21
Speaker
Yeah, sort of. I just put like an explanatory image in our document, which is in this article, which is a MIT technology review article that I pulled this from. But it's like basically there's an image
00:36:38
Speaker
which is tagged at like a normal a house which uh Which is tagged as fantasy art would be this is a normal one Would produce like this like a house that looks like a fantasy like it looks right but the poison model takes information that is That is tagged as fantasy art makes it think that it looks like something completely different Non-recognizable or yeah entirely different, right? Yeah
00:37:04
Speaker
So like, yeah, so like it has a bunch of it shows like it could poison what it thinks is a dragon so that it looks it's actually looks like a bunch of pebbles and that kind of thing. And so I honestly, I'm not smart enough to know exactly how it works, but I have to imagine, though, that basically this is just returning serve from A.I. because I would imagine what we're going to see here is
00:37:32
Speaker
OpenAI or whatever other tools are out there doing this, what they're going to do is basically take the data set that they already have here and parse, is this at least 80% compliant with what I would expect from an output of this? And, you know, looking at this example here, it looks like a picture of a house that Hansel and Gretel would stay out in an animated book that I'm reading to my children. And at the bottom,
00:38:01
Speaker
it looks like, I don't know, an abstract Picasso painting of like maybe a landscape that's blue and green and orange. And like, if I just learned to disregard the meta text that you're putting in there to poison this, like, great, then AI has returned to that volley yet again. And I suspect that this is the way that it's going to be, where open, generative AI ingests everybody's stuff.
00:38:30
Speaker
Everybody who's stuff got ingested gets ticked off about it. Uh, and so they fire back with these poison pills and we just train the generative AI to disregard these poison pills. So you get smarter poison pills and it's going to be like, uh, white hat and black hat hackers going back and forth all the time of like, Oh, we put up a new defense mechanism so that you can't hack this. We figured out your new defense mechanism. We're going to beat that. And it's just like back and forth Trump carding. I, I'm interested in the,
00:39:00
Speaker
prospect that like open AI and Facebook or whatever that Facebook's AI thing is called and Twitter's AI thing. Like they learn where the competing models are getting their data and then they intentionally
00:39:16
Speaker
put a bunch of poison data into those places. They just know not to train their own place, their own people in those places, their own models in those places. We're sabotaging data sets now. That's the new corporate espionage. Sabotaging the opponent's data sets, not just as like an activist thing for the artist, but like as a corporate, corporate sabotage. It is like these models are going to be hard enough to get, make better as it is because
00:39:44
Speaker
The last 5%, the last 10% to plausibility is always going to be the hardest. And so having to deal with this back and forth is going to be really interesting. I will say y'all have seen me. I've been keeping y'all updated against your will. I've been having a lot of fun with AI image generation, like useful fun and creating flyers for events for my bar association.
00:40:09
Speaker
And Dolly 3 is like super good. I'm getting better at prompts. Getting better at prompts really makes it a lot better. And it's like, oh, this is like basically exactly what I wanted. Yeah, you can zero into where you don't need any editing. Yeah. Once you get the prompt down. But to that, to what you're saying, so Jason's point was that the AI is going to get smart enough to disregard things, right? And so it's not going to ingest the bad data, basically.
00:40:35
Speaker
My question about that, and it's not really a question directly for either of you, but just to the ether, is I don't know to what extent the managers of these AI large language models are able to put those kind of controls in place. If you believe them, they have already sort of insinuated that they don't have a lot of control over what it ingests and how it learns, and they don't exactly know how it works either. I think a lot of that was nonsense to say that this thing is alive and to sort of generate the buzz they wanted at the start.
00:41:03
Speaker
But I do think there is something to it. The reason is this. If you notice, especially with OpenAI with chat GPT.
00:41:11
Speaker
any controls they want to try to put in place in terms of what it can generate in terms of like hate speech or like a recipe to make a bomb or something like that, they always put the control at the prompt level where if you try to ask it to do something with the prompt that it recognizes as being problematic, it will say, I'm sorry, we can't advocate violence or whatever, right? Or I'm a large language model, I can't do that.
00:41:34
Speaker
And then you will notice there will always be somebody who will find the way to ask it a different way. And the model will be able to say the thing that it's not supposed to be able to say. And so what that seems to suggest is it's perhaps maybe it's possible that open AI is just not interested in scrubbing that ability from the language model and instead is just controlling at the prompt level. But I wonder if that's
00:41:55
Speaker
The reality of the only way they can control it is like we just have to basically we can't unteach that thing in that back room how to make a bomb. All we can do is stop people from asking it how to make a bomb. Right. Because it's looking at. Yeah, it's looking at everything. Right. And so that's the case. They don't have they've not considered how to put those controls in place. And it is already ingested those images and will continue to do so. And I don't see how you have prompt control for that. Oh, they're just.
00:42:22
Speaker
I don't see how you could really say disregard the meta because like that itself, I think takes a whole lot of work because we see this picture of a house and that says fantasy art. How does it know that it's fantasy art? Well, you could say it looks like other fantasy art that they've that they've looked at, which is from a clean sample that they know to be clean. But then that then you're just looking at the same stuff over and over.
00:42:47
Speaker
Right, right. You're just you are looking at a defined reading of what what your thing considers fantasy art and it's never going to be anything else. And then it's never learning, which I think is contrary to how they want these things to operate. So that alone would be a huge sacrifice for these large language modeled companies to be like, we're only going to train it on the defined data sets because
00:43:12
Speaker
I don't think they're gonna wanna do that. No, they're gonna keep crawling the entire internet. Yeah, yeah. And so then you have to look at the prompt. Well, basically what they're gonna do is what Google's been doing for years, which is they're gonna outsource the labor for this sort of parsing out the extraneous, you know, one of these things is not like the others using CAPTCHA. And, you know, they're gonna,
00:43:38
Speaker
Basically make us to do that to log into our stuff making it pose as security or they'll find some other way or they'll you know, make it make it so that you can get new candy crush tokens if you parse this stuff like before you log into your bank. Is this an image of an elven woman smoking a vape pen? Yeah, it is. Okay, cool. Listen, you're negative $100 in your account.
00:44:02
Speaker
That's the future we've all dreamed of. That may be the funniest thing that I've ever seen. Congratulations. That was very good. Thank you. I appreciate that. Score one for Andrew. Thank you. So on AI, sort of related to it a little bit, I think this was also a Jake story. I looked it over. I don't know how much you want to talk about it. The proposed advisory opinion on lawyers and law firms use of generative. The thing I thought was, so what this is, I should explain it better. The Florida Bar apparently has the board review committee on professional ethics is considering. Leading the way.
00:44:31
Speaker
adopting. Yeah, a proposed advisory opinion. Consider adopting a proposed advisory opinion. I don't know how that works at the direction of the Florida Bar, blah, blah, blah, about the law firms. They're like a, they're a committee and the committee proposes it to the Florida board of governors. So if the, this thing will go to the bar, board of governors to consider whether or not it should be considered
00:44:53
Speaker
advisory and therefore all the binding on the Florida lawyers. It's meant to be rules as to how you can use AI as a practicing attorney. Is that a good quick summary of what these... I think it's... How they should view it. Yeah. Is it more specific? Is it litigators in court filings or is it just in general?
00:45:19
Speaker
I think it was in general and also very specific. Like it asks, like, should you be, how you should be able to charge for their use of an AI? For example, number one is whether a lawyer is required to obtain a client's informed consent to use generative AI in the client's representation, which is interesting as though your client is in a position necessarily to understand what they are. Yeah. Consent. I mean, how are you going to make that informed consent?
00:45:46
Speaker
How do you even know what an AI is? That's all fake anyway because a lot of things marketed as AI are fake.
00:45:54
Speaker
Also, there's a huge difference between the case text AI, which basically just does a legal research for you. It's a brilliant search. Versus getting chat GPT to write your brief. Or like a Bing search. Do you have to tell your client, listen, I'm going to probably use the new version of Bing a little bit. I need you to understand what that means. I need you to sign this document saying you understand it.
00:46:20
Speaker
And I and I mentioned this in the slack and our slack that I was considering submitting a comment. I'm not going to but like I don't see why there should be an advisory opinion beyond.
00:46:34
Speaker
Like, this is just another tool. You're responsible for everything that you give your client, regardless of whether it's made by AI, to the same extent you'd be responsible for something you write. It's not the same as having an associate, but even if you have an associate, you're still responsible for the things the associate does. It's just that the Florida bar can't sanction AI.
00:47:02
Speaker
Um, so I don't, I don't really think there needs to be all these explanations. It's just beyond. And I don't think there need to be any special rules about charging for it because it's like, look, what do you charge for? I would love an advisory opinion on what you charge for using, uh, um, for like running text recognition, uh, in a way that takes like 30 minutes. Like, what do you do when you are running text recognition on your computer?
00:47:32
Speaker
and it takes 30 minutes and it's locking up your computer because it's taking it too much. Is that billable? I would love to see them give an answer on that. Well, what I wonder about this too is, I don't think any of us were, we weren't practicing to know if this was true, but were these sorts of advisory opinions, was all this hand wringing around for like when Lexus first came out with like head notes or shepherdizing?
00:47:59
Speaker
where like yeah right where there's some sort of like right yeah hold on listen uh we got to figure out whether or not you could use it you have to you know get conformed consent from your client as to what look i'm relying on some of some shepherdized cases and i can't be totally certain uh no you just check that's on you wait i you know i wouldn't be that surprised if there was some some handwriting about the shepherdizing thing because you used to have to go
00:48:23
Speaker
and lick yourself, right? Online shepherds. Yeah, because there was a physical version of shepherdizing first, right? I don't exactly know how that worked. I never learned how it worked. I know some people who are just a little bit older than me had to learn how to physically shepherdize stuff.
00:48:42
Speaker
Shepherdizing is a TM thing. It's for LexisNexis. What it is is if you have one case that you're looking at, you can basically run a search of any cases to treat that as affirming the conclusion or invalidating portions of it or whatever. Red light, green light, you know if a case is still good law.
00:49:02
Speaker
Because yeah, cases are not necessarily good. But right. Like if you find a case from 1975 and you're just looking at it in a vacuum, you don't know if there's a case in 1985 that said that guy was crazy. That none of that's true. This is what this is what stops lawyers from citing Plessy v. Ferguson in support of their arguments. Right. I like I've run into like, you know, not shepherds doesn't touch everything. So right. I had a case in criminal court where
00:49:30
Speaker
My client, I took it over in the middle. My client had testified at the grand jury as part of a plea agreement or as part of an agreement where they testified. They got immunity. It was part of an immunity deal, right? And there was a signed immunity deal and she testified. And then, um, and then the state went back on the deal for basically they got pissed at her for another reason and they went back on the deal and they were going to, and I was like, no, she's immune.
00:49:59
Speaker
And there were, there were cases, there's two kinds of immunity. There's transactional immunity and then something else. Uh, but the basic gist of it, I don't remember the terms for it, but use immunity. Yeah. So, okay. So use immunity, meaning we can't use that testimony against you. I think that's what use immunity is. And then transactional immunity means we can't charge you for the crimes associated with these statements.
00:50:25
Speaker
Um, and so it's, you know, speech versus you versus the crimes themselves. And they weren't trying to use her statements against her, but they were trying to charge her for something. And there was, um, and I had a kid, there was a case from 1985 that said that Houston immunity attached in these cases. And I used that case.
00:50:46
Speaker
Turned out it was reversed a year later, but nothing was in shepherds and that case that reversed it, uh, didn't cite that the case from the year earlier saying that it's not in shepherds. Yeah. Right. So it didn't cite the case. It was just that my case from 1985 existed and then nobody cited it again ever. And I was like, and I was like, well, this must mean that this is the seminal case.
00:51:10
Speaker
You know, I was, uh, you know, uh, and it turned out, no, it was the, it was that it was reversed a year later, uh, by statute. And nobody talked about that explicitly, uh, because there was a, the 1985 case was based on actually on a 1983 statute that was then changed before the 1985 case.
00:51:33
Speaker
was, uh, had actually come down. So it was like, you know, anyway, so stuff like that happens. Sure. And that's a different than some AI horror story, right? In terms of like, if you wanted to hand ring a hand ring about relying on shepherds, there you go. There's your situation right there. Look what happened to this poor client who had terrible representation or whatever. Right. But the point is that, uh, like if, uh, but let's say shepherds didn't exist, I would be expected to go looking around for cases, right?
00:52:03
Speaker
to see whether or not something had, and I did try to look around for cases actually, but you know, sometimes there's just not as much as you would like. But now it's just kind of accepted that you can rely on Shepherds, you can rely on Keysight, you can rely on those.
00:52:21
Speaker
And, but I'm sure that when they first came out, it was like, you're letting somebody else do your work for you to agree to that. Yeah. Like, you know, I'm, I wouldn't be surprised if somebody was, was talking, was saying that kind of thing. Yeah. Yeah. Could be. I mean, I don't, I don't see it in like, it doesn't come up. I don't, I don't see it referred to anywhere, but maybe that's just because that's pre-internet and.
00:52:43
Speaker
Yeah. You wouldn't really, there's not going to be, you know, old news reports kicking around. I mean, it was way, way pre-internet. If you're talking about shepherds in general, like God, 60s or 70s or something. I'm very interested to know when they came around. I bet it was before that. They sound like one of those services that have probably existed since like the 1800s or something. All right. Shepherd citations. I have real time pulled up the, uh,
00:53:08
Speaker
Prior to the development of electronic citations like Westlaw's Keysight during the 1990s, Shepherds was the only legal citation service that attempted to provide comprehensive coverage of US law. It derives from a legal service begun by Frank Sheppard, born in 1848 and died in 1900. In 1873,
00:53:23
Speaker
When Shepherd began publishing these lists, good job, 1800s, you got it. Hey, score one point for Jake. Score one point for speculating at time periods when legal developments happen.
00:53:39
Speaker
So all that's to say, uh, you think that, you know, they probably didn't care in 1870. They're like, Oh, cool. Oh, thank God. Yeah. They're, yeah. They, you're like, Oh my God, I sure, glad lead. I don't have to take my horse down to the law up to from right up from Atlanta to the only law library in my, in, uh, in the South and yeah, Appomattox. I don't know.
00:54:04
Speaker
You get some real geography problems there, bud. Yeah. So yeah, I mean, I think probably what you're aiming at here is, uh, the March of technology is going to rhyme with how it marched in the nineties and early two thousands where like, did we have this same kind of hand bringing here back in, you know, 2000 and 2005, let's say, uh, of like,
00:54:34
Speaker
Oh, can you really trust this online shepherdizing tool? Or should you go back and use the actual book that's in the library? Because you know, there's not a gremlin in the machine of the book that's going to be there trying to deceive you. I think there's a pretty solid chance that it rhymes, especially once OpenAI and other sources like that start pointing themselves at Google Scholar and LexisNexis and Westlaw and
00:55:04
Speaker
Oh gosh, what was the early, early episodes? We were talking about the court listener or something like that. That was people were installing plugins in their browsers. Yeah. Yeah. The pacer stuff. Yeah. Yeah.
00:55:17
Speaker
Yeah. So maybe they're just ingesting all of that now. Like great. Like there's no reason why all of that stuff should belong only to Lexus Nexus and Westlaw. And I would say case texts, but they've been gobbled up by Westlaw. Yeah. I think like this, I don't remember which one bottom fast case, fast case still seems to be independent. Like God bless them. Uh, so like, uh, yeah, I think we're going to see the same kind of thing and then it's going to become super normalized by
00:55:45
Speaker
What, you want to handicap this? I'm guessing 2030 will think nothing of using AI to do our legal research. Yeah, I mean, I think once it's, I mean, I think for normal folks, once it's built into like every version of Microsoft Word, generative AI, that's it, it's over. It'll just be, it's like auto correct. It's just going to be a thing that's there and that's it. In terms of for legal research, yeah, maybe 2030, I can see that. It'll take a little longer, sure. Sure, lawyers be slow.
00:56:14
Speaker
Yeah. I, for legal research, it may be the first, it's the first search you do, right? Yeah. Is the first search you do is always give me the legal, the, the.
00:56:27
Speaker
the memo written by this AI. But you gotta go deeper, I think, most of the time, at least to look behind the mask and actually look at the decisions. If it's like the Bing, what's in there in Bing, it'll have citations, and then I can go look at the actual thing written by the judges, and then easy peasy, and it's good. Ah, Jake, your mindset is stuck in 2025. Yeah.
00:56:52
Speaker
You got to think you're small minded. Yeah. Oh my God. It's coming back around. It's coming back. Heaps coming back for the listener. Jason called me small minded. I don't even remember the context. Was it AI? I think we were talking about AI and I was like, I think it was this exact topic actually, right? Exactly the point in this conversation. It was tongue in cheek. Yeah. And Jake.
00:57:18
Speaker
be, we, we are actually in agreement. My point where my position is that there's way too much money going into generative AI and that generative AI doesn't actually have that much of a use case. Yeah. Like using AI, like really what we're talking about when we come to this generative AI for research is literally just, it's not even really the generation part. It's the location part that the AI stuff
00:57:44
Speaker
is really good at. I don't need a memo. You show me all those cases about this law, this port of law, and that is what I want. I don't need you to write the essay for me, but okay, you want to make a whole business and doing the writing for me. I'm not going to pay that much for it. That's the thing. How many people are going to pay a lot for it?
00:58:11
Speaker
Um, no, I don't think the market is that big for that kind of stuff. And I think you're underestimating the deep. I think, I think you're underestimating the deep pockets of big law that will shell out mega bucks for a tool that is, uh,
00:58:29
Speaker
Let's say accessory at best. Why would big law ever put a ton of money into reducing their billable hours? Oh, no, they're still going to bill for it as though an associate did it. It's value-based billing, Jake. They'll fire associates. They'll make you do more work.
00:58:46
Speaker
They'll go, oh, great. This does most of the work for you. So now you can do what we used to think would take 30 hours in one day. So get to work. This episode's been great. We've talked about D&D. We've talked about AI. We've talked about hating big law. Let's round it out here. We've got a follow-up topic about Twitter here. So now we can just hit every major cornerstone of this podcast. All the things we hate. Yeah, that's right. And so I'm not D&D. I don't hate AI either.
00:59:13
Speaker
No. Yeah. So the Twitter story is Elon Musk is an idiot. He's going to charge a dollar a year for new users on X. I'm sorry, not Twitter on X.
00:59:21
Speaker
Uh, he's calling it the like not a bot charge or something because he can't decide if Twitter is full of bots or he's going to cite how many millions of active users as proof that Twitter is doing better than ever. He doesn't seem to be able to sort out like literally day to day, whether he's counting bots in his number or there's too many bots on Twitter and he needs to implement something like this. So $1, $1 a year for all new users. I think he's going to roll out in the next. Yeah. They're testing it in like New Zealand or something like that. Yeah. Um,
00:59:52
Speaker
That doesn't really feel like the place to test it. I'm pretty sure the place to test it would be Russia, but what do I know? They're testing it in New Zealand and the Philippines. Yeah, this is, I mean, it's not worth a dollar. I don't think people, the number of people who are not gonna sign up because they just have to put in payment information is insane. That's what I was just gonna say. It's not the dollar, it's the payment information. I don't wanna put my credit card or anything else tied to my Twitter account.
01:00:21
Speaker
And for Twitter, it's also, we want your payment information is, but also so that we can charge you for voice calls or something. Cause they just rolled out calls for some reason, which are on by default on iOS app. I don't have the app installed on my phone, so I don't care about that.
01:00:38
Speaker
But yeah, that's seems extremely stupid. Well, for a business, if they're going to try to run it like it has been as a mass market business, whose entire idea is that you get your people, you get as many people on there as possible, which seems like the only way that Twitter would survive
01:01:01
Speaker
That's very, very not smart. One of my favorite pieces of feedback that I've seen about this is just wait until Elon Musk learns about credit card processing fees. Because I think if you have a $1 transaction, I don't think they're going to settle for just having the little 3% haircut that the credit card company takes. It's going to be like 30 cents or something. Yeah. It'll be in that range where they charge you like 20 cents plus 3% or something like that.
01:01:30
Speaker
Cool. Go for it. Elon. I know you're not counting on this as a profit center, but like, yeah, just something like even just the additional processing required to, to have another page that is a payment page and have a checkout page, like the strain on the servers for all those people signing up will absolutely cost more than the 60 cents profit. No, not profit, right? The 60 cents that's left after the credit card processors take their fee. Yep.
01:01:56
Speaker
Yeah. Stupid. Okay. So, uh, we can, uh, quickly do our sports stuff. You guys going to watch the world series? Yes. Yeah. Yeah. I hope it goes seven games. I hope, I hope it goes seven games. I hope every game is close. Uh, I hope it's really, really exciting because this is like, this is like what's magical. This is like the MLB version of watching the little league world series. Like these are professionals. These are good baseball players, but they're not a lot of baseball players that people pay a lot of attention to.
01:02:23
Speaker
that a lot of people pay a lot of attention to. The people who are Rangers fans, good for them. The people who are Diamondbacks fans, I don't know who you are, but good for you. We're going to see some names that people can get excited about. Good for Evan Longoria, the sunset of his career being able to appear in the World Series.
01:02:47
Speaker
Good on you. And there are some, you've got Max Scherzer, who's going to be playing, like some exciting stories as far as that's concerned. So I think it'll be good, wholesome, not glitzy baseball. And I like that.
01:03:05
Speaker
I think that was kind of settled. I mean, I guess you could argue the Astros have become, I wouldn't say glitzy. They're hated for sure. They're huge though. They're the whole reason I watched the championship series.
01:03:18
Speaker
Oh, really? Just to make sure that they went down to make sure that they got taken out by the Rangers. Isn't this like the first time in three years or four years that they're not in the World Series? That's not the first time. That's not right. But it's neither they nor the Dodgers were in the World Series in like six years. Yeah. Yeah. And like, great. Let's bring in. Let's shift away from big dynastic
01:03:45
Speaker
Teams from you know the late teens and early twenties and let's see some new teams play baseball like let's give phoenix a reason to get excited dallas god knows dallas needs a reason to get excited because the cowboys are boring but.
01:04:03
Speaker
The Rangers. The Cowboys are doing okay. They're not doing great. They're on the downside. They've been okay so far, but the implosion is coming. Sorry, dad. You're not listening, but sorry, dad. The interesting thing about the Rangers was when Scherzer made the trade from the Mets to the Rangers earlier in the year, the big thing was that he didn't want to be on a team that wasn't going to be competitive. He wanted to go somewhere. You know, it's the end of his career. He wants to win. He wants to win the World Series and all the sport
01:04:32
Speaker
sports writer op-eds that we're talking about at the time were like, so you went to the Texas Rangers? And the same thing with DeGrom when he signed last year or whatever with the Rangers. What are you talking about? You want to win a world championship. Why would you go to Texas? I mean, if you're going to go to Texas, you go to Houston, right? You're not going to the Texas Rangers. They knew something.
01:04:53
Speaker
I mean, it's funny because both the Diamondbacks and the Rangers didn't have that great a regular season. Like they were not the Diamondbacks especially. I think they lost like 74 games or something. I forget, they lost over 70 games. They were last place in among the teams that in the NL that made it to the postseason. They had the worst record of that, of that, you know, that group, whether that's five teams or whatever. But that's been the case for a while. Like once the Braves were out and the Dodgers were out,
01:05:20
Speaker
You were looking at kind of an oddball world series. And the Orioles. And the Orioles. You're right. Yeah. And the Orioles. But I mean, like if the Phillies had continued on instead of the Diamondbacks, that's equally strange. They didn't have a great season. Right.
01:05:32
Speaker
It's really only the Astros that was sort of a surprise. I do have to root for the diamond, but I hate the Rangers. It's been so weird for me rooting for the Rangers as an A's fan. Because as an A's fan, I kind of like the Mariners even though they were rival.
01:05:51
Speaker
Right. Because like they they just are so there. I love each row and and they were just like kind of. They had Griffey and A-Rod. They had A-Rod before A-Rod. They had A-Rod when people didn't realize that he was terrible. Yeah. Yeah. And they had that one year where they won like one hundred and eighteen games and then didn't make it to the World Series. 2001. And you know, they just like are one of those teams that can never seem to get it together. And I love that for them.
01:06:19
Speaker
But I hated the Angels and I hated the Rangers. So I still have, like, I loved the Rangers when they were playing the Astros and now I hate them again.
01:06:29
Speaker
You know, um, there's not a lot to get excited about on the Rangers roster, but there are a couple of good things. Like, uh, Nathan Navaldi has had a great season. Uh, he's been great Scherzer. It's like twilight of his career. Uh, you have some other like Corey Seager, like he's kind of really aside from, uh, our oldest Chapman and Max Scherzer, like he's the star power.
01:06:53
Speaker
on, uh, that roster and adults Garcia had just a monster of an ALCS. I'm like, I hope he's able to keep that up. And there are some exciting players to watch on the, uh, on the diamond backs too. Like, uh, Gabby Moreno, like he's a pretty solid watch there the whole time.
01:07:16
Speaker
And so, and they've got both teams have good rookie stories. They've got Josh Young on the Rangers and what's the fella's name? The young guy for CC or his initials. I can't remember his last name on the Diamondbacks.
01:07:32
Speaker
Yeah, there you go. That's the fellow like good rookie stories on both teams, good old guy stories on both teams. Like it's set up to there are good narratives to make here. There's an interesting political story about the Diamondbacks because they're the next up.
01:07:50
Speaker
for baseball owners squeezing their communities to get stadium money after the A's and the raise because the raise, the raise are looking set. St. Pete, Tampa are going to give them like a billion dollars. So, you know, they're like, thank you. Thank you very much. We will stay and take your billion dollars. But
01:08:14
Speaker
Arizona, I believe they had a referendum that stopped any public money from going to the stadium or that's familiar. Yeah. Yeah. Backs. Referendum. Well, I mean, they've been a losing team. So they, along with the, the race came up, came about in the expansion in 98 and they've clearly got the worst end of the end of the stick in terms of being competitive for all these years. So I can kind of see that.
01:08:44
Speaker
Arizona is not particularly interested in, in paying to have their, uh, their stadium renovated or rebuilt or whatever. I think they won a world series in 2001 and that's their only, that's the only world series win ever between either of these two teams. So that's fun too. I thought you were joking. Yeah. They beat the Yankees in 01. They beat the Yankees in game seven against Mariano Rivera.
01:09:05
Speaker
Yeah, which is, I remember what God, there was a, there's, I remember that very well. That was a great moment for me as, as a certified Yankee hater. Um, that was a great moment. It's 2001. New York is supposed to win the world series though. I don't understand how that's gonna, was that, uh, there's like a single, am I confusing it with the Marlins? Um,
01:09:26
Speaker
No, there's like a big tall white guy that had like one of those, uh, stances where he just like, uh, moved where he was just like moving a lot before. And then he just like hit a like blooper up the middle to win that world series. I remember that pretty well.
01:09:43
Speaker
The name is like O'Brien or something, I don't remember. Or Lee, I thought. Something Lee or something. I know you're talking about, yes, that is the weird stance. The 90s had some weird stances. You had people who faced the pitcher holding the bat straight over their head like it was a sword and they were going to run at the pitcher.
01:10:00
Speaker
right chef yeah yeah they had some really strange uh thoughts about what was a good uh was good some people that looked like they were sandwiches bent in half like just like claims like that looks so uncomfortable man like why are you bent over like that
01:10:17
Speaker
I think the strike zone was at least ostensibly supposed to be at that point shoulders and knees or something. So the thought was if you compress yourself enough, you have a small enough strike zone. Uh, you know, it's hard to strike you out. It's probably hard to hit the ball too, but you know, these are squatting, right? Knees and letters. Doesn't matter.
01:10:35
Speaker
So that's going to be my recommendation is watch the World Series. Enjoy the good World Series storytelling that's going to come out here, even if it has to come from, what's his face, Joe Buck.
01:10:48
Speaker
Oh god, Joe Buck. Ignore Joe Buck. Ignore Joe Buck. Listen to John Smoltz. Underrated. Yeah. Listen to John Smoltz? Yes. Is that what you said? Yeah. John Smoltz is awesome. Found the Braves fan. I have to tell you, the rest of America disagrees. About John Smoltz being good? Yeah. Yeah. Nobody. No, like, I'm a Braves fan.
01:11:08
Speaker
I don't want to listen to him. No, I'm not. I wouldn't call myself a great man. I like the Braves. I grew up watching John Smoltz and and you know, all those great strangers, Maddox Glavin and Millwood. No, I'm done listening to John Smoltz. Yeah, I'm good with Smoltz. Hater. Hater. Yeah. But you like Joe Buck? Ugh. Yeah, I don't understand that. He's underrated. That's that's my feeling. I know. Yeah, he's underappreciated.
01:11:37
Speaker
Oh boy, okay.
Music and Gaming Releases
01:11:39
Speaker
That's a bold one to go out on. But okay, so my recommendation is also, yeah, World Series, I think it'll be good. Additionally, Gaslight Anthem, good band. They haven't had an album in 10 years. There's a new album coming out tomorrow, or probably today, if you're listening to this, not at 11 o'clock at night on a Thursday, instead on a Friday. It's a good band. They're single so far, good. I think it'll be a good album. Are they just gone?
01:12:01
Speaker
kind of like Jersey Shore stuff. So it's like a little mix of that, a little mix of jazz stuff, a little mix of rock, alt, a whole bunch of different things. Okay. Interesting. One of their singles features Bruce Springsteen as you have to, if you're coming out of New Jersey. I think they call it Springsteen Punk is what the genre is called. Springsteen Punk is the name of the genre.
01:12:22
Speaker
Yeah, it's like this is like the like, I don't know if you realize how Jersey all this sounds like very Jersey. I can imagine it's very Jersey. Yeah, it's a good band. Good album. I think it'll be good. Okay. Okay. Uh, I don't have any record. I do. I have a recommendation. I'm trying game coming out in like two hours or so. There's a game coming out in two hours called Alan week two. I don't recommend Alan week one because it's, it's kind of a slog. I recommend watching a video of what happened in all one. The events of Alan week one are really cool.
01:12:52
Speaker
Uh, you don't have to I don't even I can't even recommend allegheny too because I haven't played it. Um, I don't know I can recommend control You're just game. That's a good game The previous which was is in the same universe and is one of the best it's like an x-files x-files crossed with superhero crossed with uh a uh
01:13:15
Speaker
Government bureaucracy show Yeah, this is the this is the group the development studio that made Max Payne, right? Yes, they are people I like those games. Those are good. It's funny how I watched somebody play Max Payne recently They're remit. They're remaking Max Payne But I was in for that recently and I played it when I was like 12 or something like a little whatever was 14, right? When it first came out, I didn't realize just how silly it was. I
01:13:41
Speaker
Uh, where it's like you, you know, you're this detective and he's, you know, saying all this extremely cliche noir stuff. Right. And then you come up on mafia guys and they're like, we're going to whack this sucka. It's like, oh, okay. You know exactly what you're doing. Like this is just very silly. You're not trying to play this serious at all. I still think about it once in a while. If I take like any sort of like candy or something and I put it in my hands and I eat it, I take the pills to ease the pain.
01:14:10
Speaker
That's what he said. The line seemed cool when you're 12. I take the pills to ease the pain. Doesn't really resonate so well once you're even 16. But it was pre-opioid crisis. Yeah, that's true. Where you could just down four bottles of pills and nobody would really think about it. No big deal, yeah.
Outro Song Discussion
01:14:32
Speaker
All right. Well. Adios. What was the prompt for this song? Oh, I don't know.
01:14:41
Speaker
I have no idea. Supreme Court, Surf City, the world of USA. It's not awful, it's a pretty good outro, I think. Yeah, works for me. The best coast. Have a good night. We can stop now.