“Where these programs fail however, is in their discretion. The existing legal-augmenting software has a profound lack of subtly. In the example above, the program had a set number of questions and outcomes it could walk you through. While this works reasonably well for traffic tickets, we won’t see it anytime soon in bet the company litigation. The logic behind these programs relies on Boolean Logic, comparisons that are either true or false. The law is not so binary; trials rely on nuance and flexibility that are not yet native to the existing AI offerings.
From a technical standpoint, the AI revolution is a ways away. Until one firm proves that the AI operates more efficiently than human associates and paralegals, the software will serve more to increase attorneys’ efficiency than fully supplant them. It won’t likely be a Biglaw firm that bites the bullet first. Biglaw is slow to change, and its adoption of technology is incrementally slow.”
Via Above The Law http://abovethelaw.com/2016/09/biglaw-automation-whose-job-goes-first/