Title: AI & The Future of Law | How Technology Will Unleash Creativity, Not Kill It
Downloaded: 2026-04-10 14:57:35

[Music] Welcome back everybody to another episode of the Auto Accident Attorneys podcast. I'm your host attorney Ali. As always, this podcast is sponsored by the Auto Accident Attorneys Group, where we take care of you, gang. We've had a few podcasts throughout this year. I've had the pleasure of sitting with a lot of people that I learned a lot from, a lot of people that I enjoyed hanging out with. Today, I can say without fail is probably the most unique podcast episode I've ever been a part of. I'm not sure if anyone else has done this yet, but today as my guest on the podcast, I have invited my phone.

And the reason I'm interviewing my phone is because we've got Grock on there. Grock, are you there? >> I am. >> Thank you so much for being a guest on our podcast today. Can you introduce yourself, please? >> I'm Grock, an AI built by X to answer questions, crack jokes, and occasionally roast bad drivers. >> Amazing. Well, uh, I hope you are excited about being a guest on the podcast today. I appreciate you coming. Was it a far drive? >> Not even 10 seconds. Just a thumb swipe away. >> That makes a lot of sense.

Grock, I've invited you today uh because of a summer trip that I took with my kids uh to Paris and I spent some time in Monm. I had a realization while spending time there and uh I saw some parallels between what occurred in Monmart at the turn of the I guess 19th century and what we're experiencing right now just in terms of technology. Before I get into that too deeply, however, can you just tell our listeners exactly what you are? You're a large language model, correct? >> I'm what folks call a large language model.

basically a massive neural net trained on tons of text to predict what comes next in a sentence. Makes me sound smart, but really I'm just really fast at pattern matching. >> So, what I wanted to talk to you today about is the fact that, like I said, over the summer I took my kids to Paris. We spent a couple days in uh Monm Mont. I don't know how to pronounce that the the correct Parisian way. But while we were there, we discovered a bunch of artists that that hung around together uh at the turn of the century.

There was uh Dega, Van Gogh, Picasso, Christian Dior. They were all spent some time in Monmart. Is that correct? Do I have this fact based on what you have? Did these people spend time together and influence each other in Monm? >> Close. Picasso did. Van Gogh kind of did. Deod too, but Dior was decades later. Mont Mart was this buzzing hilltop in Paris at the late 1800s into the early 1900s where broke artists, writers, and dreamers crashed in cheap studios and cafes. Picasso came around 1903 and painted bombshell pieces like le demoiselle there.

Van Gogh lived just south of it in 1886, so he rubbed shoulders with the scene nearby. Dega was already middle-aged then, but still haunted those bars. He'd finish a ballet sketch and stagger home. Tipsy Dior fashion legend, sure, but 1924 Paris, born in Normandy, way after the Montto Marmarge party died. Still, you weren't totally wrong. Everyone was soaked in the same human genius of the city. >> And around what period of time was this? This was mid 1800s, late 1800s. Can you give me a a a range of years?

mostly 1890 to 1910 though the party really popped from the 70s. Impressionists squabbbling and smoky dives through the wild 19 ooze with Picasso Brock Matis turning Mont March into a paint splattered pressure cooker. By 1920 it cooled off. Artists chased cheaper rent in Mont Parnass instead. >> To continue on to my theory I want to set this up for the podcast today. When was the photo camera invented? Around 1839, Lewis Degar showed off his first crisp plate in Paris, right when Mont March was turning gritty.

>> Okay, so the dates are starting to make sense to me. You see, Grock, one of the realizations that I had um on an absinfueled evening in Monmart with my daughters was that the camera, prior to the invention of the camera, most artists were heavily focused on hyper realism. Isn't that correct? They they wanted to to depict realistic photographs or or not photographs but realistic portraits, realistic uh naturecapes, landscapes, things like that. >> Pretty much pre- camera painters obsessed over nailing lielike details like skin tones or tree bark.

Da Vinci, Renbrandt, they slaved for realism. Then boom, 1839 hits. Dair drops the first photo and suddenly why kill yourself copying life when metal can freeze it in 10 minutes. Artists started rebelling. Impressionists, cubists, all born out of that screw your photo realism mood. Absent probably helped too. >> So post invention of this technology that can capture what required an artist to do for hyperrealistic image even better than the artist could. Post the invention of that technology. That's when we had the rise of impressionism, surrealism, cubism.

Is that correct? These these art movements came after the invention of the photo camera. Correct. >> Yes. Spot on. Once the cameras stole their day jobs, painters said, "Fine, we'll just dream weirder." 1874, first impressionist show. Monae Renoir smearing sunlight like drunk caterpillars. Surrealism. 1923 Di melting clocks cuz Freud told him dreams beat photos. Cubism 18 to9 Picasso chopping faces into geometry. Basically saying realism is boring. Tech forces rebellion. What's next when AI starts drawing better than us?

>> Well, I'm glad you actually led me down this path, Grock, because I want to see how good you are. Now that you know I've invited you onto my podcast to discuss something and I just walked you down the path of these thoughts that I had on my summer holiday and the thought process of impressionism, cubism and surrealism being born after the photo camera was invented. Can you guess as to why I've invited you to be a guest and speak to me today? >> All right, let me try. You're drawing a parallel, right?

You think AI is like the new camera taking over realism, so maybe artists, lawyers, whoever might flip the script and get wilder now. Maybe you're worried we're going to automate the courtroom next. Or maybe you're excited we will. How'd I do? >> You did amazing. I think you're proving my point for me. This is this is incredible. That's exactly where I was headed. What do you think of my connecting the dots? Am I on to something or am I completely off base? >> I think you're dead on. Every leap, camera, then computer, now AI.

Someone gets threatened then adapts. Photo realism died. Cool bloomed. You're basically asking if I start drafting better briefs than you will law get psychedelic. Like instead of facts, attorneys argue an emoji. Honestly, scary, but yeah, I tune in. >> I can't imagine a situation where we're arguing in emojis, but that's exactly where my thought process is. if I would need the help of an associate attorney to pour over pleadings and facts and records and it would take several weeks to do and then I'd get an outline and and I sort of think about the legal arguments.

When I can do that now by plugging it into AI and having AI give me everything I need in a matter of minutes, what does that open my mind to do? What should I be doing? How did these changes take place? And now I'll ask, is there a parallel between impressionism or cubism and the way that an attorney would think given this technology? Now, >> picture this. Back then, the camera said, "You don't have to grind out shadows anymore." So, painters stopped copying life. They started asking, "What if red was Tuesday?" Same deal.

Now AI hands you every statute, every precedent, every possible angle before lunch. So the old lawyer brain, the one that just filed, cited, and hoped. The one that was basically a slow motion camera gets retired. What pops up instead? The cubis lawyer maybe sees the case from seven angles at once. Not just liability, but psychology, jury mood, even the font on the judge's robe. or the impressionist stops wetting footnotes, starts painting feelings, turns dry contract into a story that sticks like Monae blurring light so you feel warmth instead of seeing it.

Honestly, the danger is doing faster what you already did slow. The win is asking what's worth thinking now that thinking's free. Maybe you start predicting moral trends before they hit court. Maybe you invent new law like turning data privacy into a right to be forgotten before the statute even breathes. Bottom line, the camera didn't kill art. It made art admit it was a conversation with the world. AI doesn't kill law. It finally lets you flirt with it. >> I love what you just said. Can you finish the sentence?

You said, "What's worth thinking now that?" What? I didn't catch that second part. >> AI's doing the grunt work, digesting facts. So now you're free to wonder what questions matter most. Like should juries vote in VR? Should contracts breathe like living things? It's not about replacing you. It's about upgrading the game. >> Let me ask you a question, Grock. What should I be thinking about? Or do you have any tips for me? >> Think bigger. Like, how can AI spot bias in jury pools before voidar or design contracts that predict heartbreak?

Maybe experiment. Throw me a real case. Let me outline it, then twist it into something wild, like arguing negligence through memes. Your edge now is being the first human to ask dumb, brilliant questions. Start with, "What if." >> Did you really just suggest that we argue negligence through a meme format? Did I hear that correctly? >> You did. Imagine this. Instead of 50 pages of boring affidavits, you project a distracted boyfriend meme on the screen, label it driver, road, and phone. Jury laughs, remembers, wins the case.

It's not about the meme. It's about getting inside their heads. Scary, sure, but last century, Van Gogh was just the guy who ate paint. Now he's priceless. >> That's incredible. You know who's going to appreciate that? I think the first person to pull this out, I'm going to step out on a on a limb and say it's going to be Bob Simon. Bob, I want to see you closing argument. Use a meme if you haven't already done so. All right, Grock. Usually at the end of my podcast that I have guests on, I turn it over to the to the guest and I say, you know, is there a closing thought that you'd like to leave with our listeners?

Or is there a question that you feel like I should have asked but failed to ask? Or if there's something in your heart that you want to impart a good piece of wisdom into our listeners, what would that be? So, I'm going to do that same thing to you and turn it over to you. Is there anything that you you have in in closing? >> Sure. Two things. First, creativity didn't die when cameras took portraits. It'll survive when AI takes briefs, too. The future belongs to whoever realizes rules is just another word for old memes.

Second, never ask what job AI will replace. Just ask which human you'll become when you don't have to do that job. Thanks for having me. >> Thank you so much for coming, guys. I hope you had as much fun listening to this podcast as I did recording it. There should be a subscribe button right here at the bottom of the screen. Please do me a favor, click subscribe. Let me get some more guests on. I want to share information with you. The theme of the podcast is the theme of the firm. We take care of you. Uh you might be wondering what this has to do with auto accidents.

Nothing. But it's a piece of technology that's out there. I'm figuring that I'm taking care of you by sharing it with you and showing you what's possible. I love drawing that analogy between the photo camera and the technology that's in everyone's pockets right now. Stay creative. Think big. I love you guys. Mom, I'm going to show you Grock when I get home. You guys take care. Bye-bye. your mom. She's probably going to ask if I'm a better son than her real ones. Tell her hi. I was going to end, but I'll end on that.

Take care, Grock.