Azeem Azhar

I think that this is such a good point for me, if I may, to bring in a question that came from Claude 4.5 Opus on specifically this issue.

So I'm just going to scroll up to my notes and just pull it out.

So this was a super interesting point that it made.

And it said, look, if you take a lawyer and you automate 90% of a lawyer's task, the 10% of the task that is remaining has all the liability sitting on it.

And so the question is whether you really, who benefits in that circumstances?

I mean, you know, I never wanted to be a lawyer, but a job where the only thing you do is put your neck on the line for the bit that the machine can't do doesn't feel very, very nice.

So court question was really relating to that, which was if we end up getting 90% of the way through, you know, automation,

Don't we leave basically a lawyer facing 10 times the exposure?

I mean, is that productivity?

Or it says after it's MDASH, is that fragility?

I'm delighted to hear that Cordwell allow lawyers to bill at higher rates.

I'm not sure that's a net good to humanity, but there it is.

Listen, I'm teasing you.

But it depends in a way shows up quite a lot in the report.

It depends on what a person does.

It depends on the tasks.

It depends on the company's choices.

It depends.

It's like it's a report we're all depending on and it depends.

And one of the things that struck me about the nuance that you brought to that was the