Imagine a junior associate who delivers every memo with identical confidence.

“The controlling case is Smith v. Jones,” she says, whether she has spent three hours confirming the citation or is half-remembering something from law school. “The statute of limitations is two years,” she announces with the same unwavering certainty, regardless of whether she checked the code or is simply guessing.

You would not tolerate this associate for long. Her uniform confidence makes her less useful, not more, because you cannot triage your review. Every assertion demands the same level of scrutiny.

Yet this is precisely how every major large language model operates today. And the artificial intelligence industry’s proposed solution — spending billions to marginally reduce hallucinations — fundamentally misunderstands what lawyers actually need.

Click here to read the full article written by Michael Ott published in Law.com.