As a lawyer who uses LLMs every day at work, I feel qualified to respond. First, hallucinations are no longer a problem. Consistent with the prediction you quoted from 2023, GPT-5.x almost never hallucinates. And overall, the percentage of inaccurate responses I get from GPT-5.2 Pro is lower than the percentage of inaccurate responses I would get from a competent junior associate (yes, fully accounting for hallucinations). Second, people wildly overestimate the difficulty of most tasks performed by lawyers. The vast majority of the things we do are not nearly as challenging intellectually as solving an Erdos problem. Key skills for a lawyer are attention to detail, ability to synthesize and reason through precedent, ability to construct logical arguments, writing, research. LLMs are *very* good at most of these things even today, and top-tier LLMs (GPT-5.2 Pro) are excellent at them. Put in another way, I feel that the biggest barrier to widespread adoption of AI by lawyers today is connectivity, interfaces, harnesses - *not* intelligence of the best models, and certainly not hallucinations. Unclear to what extent these issues will be resolved in the next 12-18 months, but given how economically valuable lawyers' work is, I wouldn't be surprised to see significant progress on that front. It's also worth considering that, given the general trend of rapidly falling costs of running reasoning models, it is likely that a model as intelligent as GPT-5.2 Pro, but *much* cheaper and faster, will be publicly available in the next 12-18 months. Note that the above assumes (conservatively) that the next 12-18 months in AI will be relatively boring: no continual learning, no drop-in virtual employees, not much further progress in agentic AI (Codex), no significant progress in intelligence possessed by the best models. Relaxing these assumptions would mean that we should expect even faster progress.