Raw LLM Responses

This is not an AI issue - it is literally a stupid people using an AI not trained and without tools to argue a legal case. As stupid as it gets. An AI can well do that properly right by having a couple of issues fixed. First, it needs access to a current legal database so it can do research. Two, you must not run a chatbot but a proper AI swarm and correction loop. You can i.e. have the output fact checked (looking up all details), you can have a self-correction loop. Result is like 20 to 30 times the number of AI calls and it is done in an AI. Sadly, this is not a chat program but a proper AI with self-correcting loops. Which - incidentally - exist ;) At least in labs (anyone interesting contact me - demonstrating this in a public product in a month or so). Problem is speed and cost for now (that is really FOR NOW, I expect those to come down in 6-9 months latest). For legal, though, the access to a legal database is an issue - as in: I can provide the tools, but not the access. It is awful how stupid those lawyers were. It is awful that AI refers to training data like that - they should move to fictional training and have AI trained to rely on tools for more. Which also requires more of what is called "attention window" and a proper AI infrastructure, both NOT available in ChatGPT ;) Funny, how things go.