And they don’t see this as an indication that their profession is doomed?
https://www.bespacific.com/law-professors-prefer-ai-over-peer-answers/
Law Professors Prefer AI Over Peer Answers
Reuters: “Law professors overwhelmingly preferred answers drafted by AI over ones written by fellow professors, a new Stanford Law School study found, suggesting that the technology is capable of legal reasoning and that law students may benefit from AI tutoring. Professors from 14 U.S. law schools developed a list of 40 questions representative of those first-year contracts students ask during faculty office hours. The professors wrote answers to the questions, and researchers had two AI platforms — Google’s Gemini 2.5 Pro and NotebookLM — also answer them. The same professors blindly judged the short answers head-to-head and chose the AI-generated ones as most beneficial to students 75% of the time. The AI platforms performed just as well as the professor rated most highly in the study. “We were frankly surprised by the magnitude of the results,” lead researcher and Stanford law professor Julian Nyarko said in an article on Stanford’s website about the study. “These weren’t just simple questions with obvious answers.” The study comes as law schools and the legal profession grapple with how to incorporate rapidly evolving AI into teaching and law practice. Earlier studies have found that AI can pass the bar exam, earn A+ law school grades, and effectively grade law school exams …”
Can you think of any other businesses that are equally vulnerable to an AI takeover?
Thrive Holdings To Bet $1 Billion On AI-Powered Accounting Roll-Up
In Thrive Holdings’ live-fire testing ground, self-improving AI models are achieving up to 98% data-entry accuracy, offering a blueprint for the automation of professional services.
Is this the only field where the practitioners have an opinion?
As A.I. Makes Strides in Mathematics, Mathematicians Urge Caution
Recently there are signs that some branches of higher mathematics, among the most rarefied realms of human achievement, are vulnerable to a shake-up by artificial intelligence. Mathematicians, in turn, have been thinking about how to respond.
On Tuesday, a group of 16 mathematicians, in consultation with colleagues and math organizations worldwide, published the Leiden Declaration on Artificial Intelligence and Mathematics. It aims to “frame the conversation about future directions,” said Dame Ursula Martin, one of the authors, and a mathematician and computer scientist at Oxford.
These are not the droids you are looking for…
https://www.rawstory.com/trump-presidential-records-act-2676990330/
Trump's own library says his DMs don't exist. A federal court disagrees.
The newly operational Trump Presidential Library claims it cannot turn up a single Twitter direct message sent by Donald Trump during his first term in office — a striking claim given that court records confirm such messages exist.
In response to a Freedom of Information Act request filed by The Washington Post at 12:01 a.m. on January 20, 2025 — exactly five years after the end of Trump's first term — the library stated it had been "unable to locate any records" related to any direct message sent from Trump's @realDonaldTrump or @POTUS accounts. The request covered the entirety of his first administration, during which Trump sent more than 25,000 public tweets.
The no-records response stands in direct contradiction to evidence produced in federal court, the newspaper reported. During special counsel Jack Smith's investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection, Twitter complied with a warrant and handed over at least 32 direct messages sent to or from the @realDonaldTrump account between October 2020 and January 2021. A Twitter attorney confirmed to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia that "there are confidential communications" in the account.
Altering reality for fun and profit?
https://www.bespacific.com/won-the-civil-war-now-banning-books-about-why-civil-war-was-fought/
The Side That Won the Civil War is Now Banning Books About Why the Civil War Was Fought
LitHub – Tom Zoellner on the Antebellum Precedent of Trump-Era Censorship: “In the days before the Civil War, the South worked hard to censor any literature that cast slavery in a negative light. Officials in Charleston, S.C. went through mailbags for abolitionist newspapers. Legislatures passed laws banning any publication that may show “a tendency to make our slaves discontented.” In Maryland, the Rev. Jacob Gruber was prosecuted for daring to preach a sermon that hinted that slavery might be sinful. Anyone found with a copy of the explosive novel Uncle Tom’s Cabin was subject to arrest. I wrote about this censorious mania to preserve the fiction of “happy and contented slaves” in a recent book about the important role played by enslaved people in achieving their own freedom. It was published in September under the title The Road Was Full of Thorns. I could not have dreamed that my book itself would be censored—by the U.S. Government, the side that supposedly won the Civil War. Censorship often works like this—indirectly, requiring no specified demands but rather a vague climate of intimidation that encourages “an abundance of caution” when making decisions about what voices should be heard.
A little background. In May of 2025, a few months into Donald Trump’s second term, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum issued Order 3431 entitled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History.” It directed the superintendents of national parks and monuments to “review property for inappropriate content” and scrub their facilities of “any signs or other information that are negative about either past or living Americans.” The order to whitewash America’s historic sites of anything less than rosy about the nation’s past has led to some predictable embarrassments. Visitors to Independence Hall in Philadelphia won’t learn much about the enslaved people owned by the founding fathers. The internment camp at Manzanar won’t have anything “negative” about the detention of 120,000 Japanese Americans in World War II. Fort Moultrie National Monument no longer has information related to rising sea levels that threaten Charleston Harbor. The order extends to books and materials on sale at the gift stores. Books related to Malcolm X and other Black leaders have been reportedly removed. My own book details the consequential events at a place called Fort Monroe in Virginia that led directly to Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation and the end of American slavery. Yet it is not for sale in the bookstore of the Fort Monroe National Monument. Because the book tells a hopeful story about how enslaved people ran toward the American flag during the Civil War, sought their own freedom and helped tip the military balance against the Confederacy, I would have thought it would have been in alignment with even the narrowest conservative definition of patriotic content. But the cover depicts seven members of the U.S. Colored Troops standing at attention. The jacket copy makes it clear that it is about slavery. It is not hard to imagine it setting off minor alarms on the part of the National Park Service or Eastern National, the concessionaire with the exclusive contract to supply the bookstore…
A strong clue to what happened might be found in a letter that went out to regional Park Service directors on November 25, 2025 asking for a review of “all retail items available for purchase in outlets operated by park cooperating associations and concessioners” to make sure they were in accord with the administration’s ideological goals. “Items identified as non-compliant with this order must be removed from sale immediately,” said the memo, signed by comptroller Jessica Bowron. A leaked database of inspections shows that officials at Yosemite National Park, Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, and the Selma to Montgomery National Historic Trail, among other places, had singled out books in the bookstore for review. At the latter place, an anonymous official wrote that “out of an abundance of caution,” books such as The 1619 Project, which details the origins of American slavery, would be targeted for removal. This was their decision, not that of the Interior Department…”
No comments:
Post a Comment