AI can’t come soon enough in the legal profession as far as I’m concerned, at least a machine can be programmed to operate with some sort of efficiency if not courtesy.

First time in a LC comment thread?

This is a terrible argument. No trainees or junior associates will or ever have been “the number one trusted board room adviser to FTSE 100 chairmen”.

This conversation isn’t about partners being replaced by AI. That obviously won’t happen. But there is concern and confusion about whether trainees/junior associates could be. Please engage with that point.

Let’s all hope none of us are doing this sh1t in 50 years time regardless…

At the moment AI development progress is limited by the fact that vast, vast resources are required to add even small amounts of additional processing power. At the moment an investment boom has been created by the fact that huge leaps in progress have been promised off the back of multi billion dollar investments. But progress is slowing and the actual improvements being delivered by the addition of more data centres and more expensive processors is rapidly becoming disproportionate to the incremental improvements and its likely that achieving the levels of processing power required to deliver the expected benefits of AI will eventually be deemed prohibitively disproportionate. And so we will have the big AI bubble burst at some stage… and it could even be this year.

I agree that disruption may be limited ‘any time soon’, but if you don’t think AI is an existential threat to the legal profession within, say 20-50 years, I’m not sure you’ve understood AI.