Will Harrelson

How many engagement letters between lawyers and clients talk about CLIENT AI use? Clients are already pasting privileged memos into ChatGPT to get plain language explanations because they assume the conversation is private. If the tool trains on their input, the privilege the lawyer worked to preserve may be waived by the client. I think one way to possibly get around this is to have the client use lawyer-supervised AI tools.. A "secure channel" of sorts.

The Artemis II crew encountered Microsoft Outlook issues en route to the Moon and requested help from Mission Control, per TechRadar.

Something you should know if you're looking to hire a wedding photographer is that a lot of photographers have "styled shoots" in their portfolio. These are basically organized events that a photographer has paid to attend, in which professional models are hired to play the part of groom and bride, with a beautiful venue and beautiful decor. They're not real weddings. Real weddings are hard. You can't control the light or the people and once a moment has passed, it's gone - there are no do-overs. Styled shoots are a common cheat. It’s kind of unethical imo. Once you know what to look out for, it’s pretty obvious. A big tell is a handsome groom. But I think most people not in the industry probably have no idea!

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer will chair a COBRA meeting over the Iran war's impact on the economy, Sky News reported.

More lawyers in trouble for AI misuse today: Attorney represented a criminal defendant and filed an application to reopen an appeal. The application alleged prosecutorial misconduct and cited quotes attributed to the prosecutor. Only problem was the quotes were completely made up. "The page Appellant cites to on page 4 for the 'legally inflammatory' statement by the prosecutor- is, in fact, the court reporter’s signature page, with no statements of any type by the prosecutor." The fake quotes came from ChatGPT. A paralegal uploaded case materials to ChatGPT and pasted the output into the application. The lawyer didn't catch it. But it gets worse: after the application was denied, the lawyer appealed the denial to the Ohio Supreme Court anyway. And when he submitted his firms "AI Policy" to show he was taking corrective action, the court determined that the policy itself was AI-generated and was incomplete. "The proffering of an AI-generated AI policy as a remedial measure in a case involving the submission of AI-generated fabrications to this court is, at best, ironic." And two months after the sanctions hearing in this case, the attorney did it again, in another case. He submitted a filing with the ChatGPT prompt embedded in the filing itself: "Would you like me to draft the next argument section (e.g., argument 1 – B on the 'nature of the charge' omission) in the same tone and format so your brief reads as a seamless multi-print memorandum?" Sanctions: -$2,000 fine -Referral to Ohio Office of Disciplinary Counsel -Must serve copy of judgment on judge of every court in which he makes an appearance, for 2 years -Must include certification that all cases are real and verified, for 2 years -6 hours mandatory CLE about AI ethics -Must write apology letters to prosecutor, trial judge, trial defense counsel, and prior appellate counsel who were defamed by fake quotes.