Sharlyn chalks this up to AI still learning, but I don’t believe that’s correct. I don’t think Generative AI tools can come up with anything new. That’s not the way it works. Large language models are developed by ingesting and analyzing tons of existing data. Based on that data, they then mathematically conjure up the most likely response to your prompt. How could it come with a genuinely original icebreaker?
The M365 newsletter is a year old, and while it’s not been a huge commercial success, it’s been fun to do, and it’s brought some value to folks, whether they are paid or free subscribers. The big thing I wanted to mention is how being a subscriber and referring your peers could help get you a limited paid subscription for free:
You can say that users aren’t allowed to use AI without approval, but as the link above points out, they’re going to anyway. And why wouldn’t they? Most of them are stressed and overworked, and you’re telling them not to use a tool that could cut some of the time spent completing assigned tasks.
Good luck with that.
I’ve been saying this to anyone who will listen to me rant about it. Your IT or Training and Development teams can only go so far when it comes to training for AI. We can do some training around prompting, show them where to click to enter a prompt, and even show them how to integrate the AI responses into their work.
What we can’t do is help them judge the results and iterate their prompts based on the results. That requires expertise in your practice area. That can only come from other lawyers. It’s also the much larger learning curve for working with AI.
Come on, get your head out of the past. Times have changed in so many ways, and there’s no reason we shouldn’t reconsider everything about how and where work gets done.
How many companies that provide hosting or build platforms for other people to communicate can’t afford to defend themselves every time someone posts something that results in litigation? Many will be forced to shut down due to the risk. Many will be targeted specifically in the hope that they will have to shut down.
When that happens, more and more voices will be silenced online. Only the rich can afford to build their platforms and keep lawyers around to defend themselves. Google and Meta will be OK. The rest of us will no longer have any outlets for ourselves. Our opportunities to communicate online with each other will be limited to what Big Tech says we can do.
It’s hard not to assume that is the goal, though.