You don’t fear a gun; You fear a man with a gun.
Likewise, you shouldn’t fear AI; you should fear dangerous men with AI.
08.07.2025 00:32
👍 3
🔁 0
💬 0
📌 0
You don’t fear a gun; You fear a man with a gun.
Likewise, you shouldn’t fear AI; you should fear dangerous men with AI.
With tests, lawyers could finally trust AI assistance because they'd have systematic verification - not just for document creation, but for document correctness.
So I’d love to know: What would you want to test in your contracts?
fullydoxxed.com/to-use-ai-la...
Write tests once, apply them to every document of that type.
Hallucinated case citation? Test catches it.
Violates state statutory requirements? Test catches it.
Wrong client entity details? Test catches it.
It's like always having a fresh pair of eyes on every document.
Legal tests work just like software tests:
- Run automatically when documents change
- Verify against pre-defined requirements
- Catch regressions from edits
- Show exactly what failed and where
Turn "hope I didn't miss anything" into systematic verification.
The real problem: AI generates documents faster than humans can review them.
Without verification infrastructure, you either:
- Slow down to manually check everything (lose productivity gains)
- Risk missing critical errors (hello, Bar sanctions)
When AI writes code, developers can:
- Compile it (immediate feedback)
- Run tests against it (systematic verification)
- Debug it step-by-step (transparent execution)
When AI writes contracts, lawyers have... track changes and hope for the best.
What if lawyers had systematic verification too?
30% of Python code is now AI-generated.
Meanwhile, many lawyers are still afraid to let AI draft a simple NDA.
The difference? Software developers have automated tests. Lawyers don't (but they should).
🧵👇 (Make sure you see the demo in the post!) fullydoxxed.com/to-use-ai-la...
This is English but reads as incomprehensible as code in a computer language I do not know—which I guess it is.
Feels like you write this to dazzle the audience so they get that the character is crazy smart, it’s not supposed to be comprehensible. For that reason, you need it all tossed in together so you don’t confuse your audience elsewhere.
At this rate, Tourette's will be considered an unfair advantage in business writing by 2026. The weirder and more unpredictable you sound, the more human you seem. Language evolves whether we like it or not. I was right about all of this, by the way.
fullydoxxed.com/fuck-chat-gp...
The future belongs to wherever ChatGPT can't go. One-sided rants. Emotional language. Stream of consciousness. Inside jokes. Raw, unqualified advice. We're about to deliberately write "worse" just to prove we're human. And it's gonna work.
Why do we hate AI writing so much? It's like C-3PO - technically correct but nobody wants to hear the protocol droid drone on. No, I don't want to "delve" into your "tapestry" of bullshit, thank you very friggin' much.
New Blog Post: Fuck! ChatGPT Really Is Ruining Writing (And I Told You So)!
Two years ago I called this shit and now it's happening - ChatGPT is making "perfect language" and its signifiers low status. Polish now equals suspicious. Clean writing screams bot.
fullydoxxed.com/fuck-chat-gp...
Wild to me that there is a machine that gives you answers correctly 80% of the time, and makes stuff up 20% of the time and most of the time people don’t double check what it says.
Sickos.jpg
Napkin math suggests that if you are making methane and extravagantly shipping in the water, that’s still only 10 cents of cost per dollar of methane, so it seems like you are right—very interesting.
A key consideration would be water, so that may make it not economical. But my prediction is that if it becomes economical it will be done.
I don’t disagree with you on the need to grow and modernize the grid, I’m just pessimistic about it happening. Would be great. Regarding pipelines, it is my understanding that there are networks of underused pipes in many states like Texas and Oklahoma that may be great places for solar.
Everything you’ve said is correct, and yet, solar has been growing at 26% per year, for many years now. Transmission capacity isn’t growing anywhere near that. We are going to need economic uses of electricity that don’t require transmission and can take TW of energy. What other options do we have?
True, but impossible if we don’t radically change policy around transmission lines.
The solar panel stat is insane. If we could turn solar into hydrocarbons, things would be wild. You could repurpose existing infrastructure to collect from disparate oil wells but with energy from the sun.
A historic moment as we witness the first American leading the Catholic Church.
Hailing from Chicago, Pope Leo XIV ushers in a new chapter that I join those in our state welcoming in at a time when we need compassion, unity, and peace.
If it’s a 100Wh battery, that’s like 1/10th of a cent of electricity? You’d need to do like 200-400 queries to match the daily electricity of usage of a refrigerator?
To avoid that generic "ChatGPT smell" in final work, I explicitly ask the model to use my voice and words from our conversation. The result? Content that actually sounds like me. fullydoxxed.com/how-i-use-ll...
When I'm stuck or procrastinating, I just start dumping thoughts to an LLM. No organization needed. LLMs are great at helping draw out and organize your thoughts so you can focus on what you *really* want to say.
My key technique? "Shared context building" - I ask the LLM to collaborate with me through questions rather than immediately drafting. This helps clarify my thinking and produces more original work.
New blog post: Some thoughts on how I use LLMs to write. It’s not about getting them to do your work but using them to help think through what you need to do. fullydoxxed.com/how-i-use-ll...
The story, then, isn’t the executive order itself, it’s the President asserting authority he doesn’t have and the acquiescence of Congress in the face of a public that is unhappy with it.
Right? Like if you are shirking from explaining the law and the facts because it facially appears to favor one side, you are presenting a politically biased take while cosplaying neutrality.
Imagine being so committed to the view from nowhere that you can’t even say that an illegal presidential order targeting your organization is illegal. Maybe this kind of journalism should be destroyed.