Gary Marcus

Rank 17 of 47

Score 69

Reposted by Gary Marcus

I sent this to a friend, who is a partner at a prominent law firm. Their response, verbatim:

“lol no.

We’ve tried all the frontier models.

It’s useful for doing a first pass on low level stuff, but makes tons of mistakes and associate has to check everything.”

Andrew Yang🧢⬆️🇺🇸

@AndrewYang

27d

A partner at a prominent law firm told me “AI is now doing work that used to be done by 1st to 3rd year associates. AI can generate a motion in an hour that might take an associate a week. And the work is better. Someone should tell the folks applying to law school right now.”

7/27/2025, 8:24:46 PM

The statement is part of a public discourse on the impact of AI on the legal profession, specifically addressing the role of AI in performing tasks traditionally done by junior associates. It engages with a societal issue concerning employment and technological advancement.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement does not directly cause harm but could contribute to anxiety among law students or prospective students about job prospects.
Principle 3:
I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
The statement provides a counterpoint to Andrew Yang's tweet, promoting a more nuanced understanding of AI's role in legal work. [+1]
Principle 4:
I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
The statement engages in constructive dialogue by providing a differing perspective without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]
Principle 7:
I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
The statement uses the platform to responsibly contribute to the discussion on AI and employment, upholding free speech. [+1]