Lawyers

Lucas (Highly likely) says

because I want to be lawyer

Czyoen Dexcel (No chance) says

Because lawyers need emotion.

AI Engineer (Likely) says

Language models are beating human level comprehension.
Expert systems are being built on tasks assume "hard for computers."

CSGuy (Likely) says

Computers are inherently more rational than humans(because they optimize utility and have no emotions), with enough computing power computers can construct better logical arguments than humans.

CJ (Could go either way) says

Nature of dispute resolution is changing

May (Likely) says

I think some functions a lawyer execute are mostly human, but lawyers also deal with lots of data. This part is already being organized by AI in automatized apps and mechanisms. There are practical chances that, in a few decades, the occupation will get more amplified to technological use

Hexel says

Lawyers are biased, make lot of mistakes and tend to twist the law for their own benefits.

Robot should replace lawyers totally to prevent these.

However, there should be investigators to input other factors to come-up with the final result.

Rubens Luiz Schmidt Rodrigues Massaro (Small chance) says

Because legal work involves most of the time direct ethical and social decisions and the bars and representative classes (who are not weak of influence) would not allow. Only a Government who doesn't care at all about this could approve the "robotization".

Art (No chance) says

Everyone comes out of Law school learning the same knowledge, however, how it is applied to the specific context of a case is highly individualized. This is an industry where the value of human capital is higher than ever.

Jessen (Highly likely) says

AI can review the claim faster than human.

Eliza Schuyler-Hamilton (No chance) says

Because robots can't reason.

Bright (No chance) says

Robots have no emotions

Gugu (Small chance) says

There is no way lawyers can be replaced by robots.

Jaro Tomik (Likely) says

I truly hope that most of what lawyers do right now will get streamlined into a basic form-based drag and drop system with a simple, easy to understand language. Especially in business contracts where the vast majority of it could be auto-generated and standardised. This will significantly reduce contract negotiation times (no wording discussion) as well as future disputes due to standardised language all across the board. Therefore, not as many lawyers will be required during creation, sign off and dispute times

sheen (Likely) says

because dude lawyer's jobs are just to present evidence and make arguments for the legal system to work

Eyal (Likely) says

Automation will lead to significant reduction in the number of lawyers required. It does not replace the need for human legal professionals but it will reduce the need for them significantly.
The foundations of the law and the artefacts produced are better structured than many other fields of human endeavors. This structure make the legal process more machine readable and understandable.

Myra Bradwell (Could go either way) says

I think clients would feel better to rely on AI to come up with the best defense and feel secure in that fewer errors are likely to take place strategically and in court. They would also be without worry that their lawyer thinks them guilty. In this sense, strategically, computers may provide better support for clientele, however, I think there is also some sense of human connection vital between lawyers and their clients- just as it is unlikely for therapist's jobs to be taken by AI due to the connection felt between the patient and doctor.

A concerned future lawyer (Highly likely) says

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/free-robot-lawyer-fighting-parking-tickets-across-us-152052274.html

That is why

Caio (Could go either way) says

A.I. is growing pretty fast

Tia (Small chance) says

robots will not be able to legally construct accurate arguments to such a complex extent in the next 20 years

hehexd (Likely) says

Most lawyers work on studying previous cases and sifting through previous cases to apply to current relevant cases. This can all be done by machines much faster and more efficiently than people.

Victor says

Use of AI will certainly change the way Law is practiced. It will not, however, affect lawyers dramatically, nor reduce drastically the number of lawyer jobs posts. A lawyer´s practice is much, much more than memorizing legislation and court decisions. The exercise of jurisdiction is complex and requires subjective, analytical and even philosophical thinking.

The situation is very different for paralegals, whose work is often "mechanical" and non-subjectively orientated.

John says

This should be split into two. The work carried out by barristers (litigation lawyers) is very different and distinct from the work carried out by solicitors (non-litigation lawyers). Presumably one or the other is more susceptible to automation.

bob joe says

there can be automation following the learning of law by AI, which can happen quickly and can be better than humans.

Dominic says

perhaps some fields of law could be automated