> it doesn't matter at all if it's always right or only 80%

People get fired every day for pasting code that is 80% right and worked on a couple test-cases.

And yet, nobody has regulated stackoverflow...

Likely because human generation of content is more expensive and doesn't scale as far?

Though SO has a lot of moderation, so it's somewhat self regulated.

What?

Never seen this happening. In contrary still not every team is doing code review and plenty of people regularly fix bugs in production.

One ex colleague invalidated all apple device certificates, didn't get fired.

A previous tech lead wrote code which deleted customer data and we found that a half year later, no one was fired.

And no one got fired at a code review.

Get a summary of a contract or law wrong, lose a few million dollars... it really is, sadly again, another peace of AI only for low risk applications.

You make it out as all/most things we do is 'high risk'.

And I clearly showed an example how LLM is more an interface than a answering machine.

If a LLM understands the basics of law it is by sure much better than a lot of paralegals of transforming the info into search queries for a fact database.

And I'm pretty sure there are plenty of mistakes in existing law activities

No, most/a lot of activities are low risk, but my point is we seem to struggle with AI in high risk while we automate human flaws.

Also, LLMs don't understand other than via the language representation.