What is the deal the AI talk?

I’ve been seeing a lot of people, that, for some reason are quite fixated, and even somewhat obsessed with proving to lawyers how the legal profession will be taken over by AI.

Nothing seems to indicate as such, nothing of value at least. Lawyers don’t seem concerned at all either. It feels like there is some agenda item where people want to spite the legal profession, or perhaps they’re trying to convince themselves that this AI rhetoric is accurate. You know, ‘say it enough times and it might just happen.’

So, I’m hoping to get some answers from lawyers or law students, such as myself, as to what the reality is and what the obsession is with the amount of randoms pushing this narrative?

I considered AI and its implications and well, I really don’t see why AI could take over the industry. Not only do I believe that the human touch, connection and understanding will always be preferable in such professions as this one, but I seriously doubt that legislators would support some robot giving legal advice, defending or prosecuting. Not to mention the inherent data risks involved, and really the list keeps going.

The more I consider and evaluate the situation, the less plausible it seems. If anything it seems that AI will improve the legal profession. In terms of productivity and the likeness, and for the possibility of genuinely sentient AI or some kind of super AI, I still don’t think we would hand these positions over to robots.

I’m quite eager for your responses, thanks for reading!