I gave Claude some decade-old deal folders and asked him to rate my performance as outside counsel.
He gave me a B+
I got points for substance and fast turnaround, but Claude wasn't impressed with my drafting "hygiene", closing protocol, and said my first draft took too long.
The boomer leaders of Japanese companies—esp. financial firms—who have dragged their feet on workplace/web modernization deserve to be shamed over this. They never made software a core competency.
Unfortunately, their employees and customers will suffer the most.
If the firm's own "innovation" team isn't champing at the bit to train their lawyers, and is instead stomping their feet because the AI vendor won't handhold them through an AI 101 orientation, fire them and start over.
I think this article gives a glimpse into what law firms actually expect and need from their ai vendors. Also shows the actual value of vertical legal ai tools (vs general purpose ai tools).
I’ve heard that in order to get Anthropic’s attention, law firms and enterprises need to pay a minimum of a few tens of millions of dollars a year.
“Attendees were accustomed to legal tech startups making well-tailored pitches on how they would train attorneys to use their products and address law firms’ needs for data privacy and work-product accuracy. What they heard in August was that Anthropic won’t let them negotiate key contract terms around privacy and data security unless they commit to a minimum amount of spending. They also left with the impression they’re more or less on their own for training, according to three sources who attended the meeting.”
“Innovation leaders said Anthropic doesn’t offer as many ready-to-use tools as those vendors or as much training. Another attendee said without the support of Anthropic, his firm might have to pay consultants to train its attorneys.”
“The primary takeaway from that meeting was that unlike a lot of other legal tech vendors, there was a strong sense that we as an industry probably don’t rate significantly high on Anthropic’s universe of expected revenue, and therefore the level of attention that we would get as an industry is relatively low,”
“Bigger firms may have the resources to implement Claude themselves, but smaller firms lack the resources to do that, said Alex Finkel, chief innovation officer at Offit Kurman. Firms like his are looking for vendors that provide pre-built workflows, trainers and AI experts. Anthropic is still in the process of building that infrastructure, Finkel said.”
news.bloomberglaw.com/legal-…
Funny dynamic in the legal business now:
• Firms are making more money than ever.
• Junior lawyers increasingly cut out of the big money.
• AI gives juniors a path to disrupt BigLaw.
• AI-savvy senior lawyers need juniors less than ever.
When I work with Claude on a contract, this is the kind of review I'm asking for.
Claude is my "second set of eyes"—an excellent proof reader.
I never allow Claude to edit the working draft directly.
Because law firms are making lots of money and lawyers are very busy, people underestimate how much legitimate demand for legal advice goes completely unanswered.
> the Verifier predicts the probability that an attorney will accept the AI-generated redline exactly as written
The probability is zero. I’ve never met a lawyer who said “lgtm”.
Japan as benchmark for social alignment...
Researchers proved every LLM is secretly obsessed with Japan.
And they finally figured out why.
They published a paper investigating hidden cultural biases in large language models.
they tested 31,000 questions across 24 different languages on models like gemini, chatgpt, claude, and llama.
they stripped out all geographic hints and just asked the models to pick a place and answer.
the finding was universal.. across a wide range of models and languages, there is a pervasive "obsession" with japanese culture.
even when you prompt them in a language with zero ties to japan, they default to japanese norms, values, and aesthetics at a disproportionately high rate compared to its actual global demographic weight.
the craziest part? they tracked down exactly when the ai develops this obsession.. and it is not from reading the raw internet.
during pre-training, the models actually have a fairly balanced, global view of the world. the obsession gets injected during the safety phase.
when tech companies fine-tune these models to be "helpful, harmless, and polite," the ai starts mapping those corporate safety guidelines directly onto japanese cultural concepts. in the pursuit of creating the perfect, inoffensive, compliant assistant, they warped how the models view the world.
the quantization process (compressing models to run faster locally) actually amplifies this determinism. the smaller and faster your local model is, the more stereotypically it behaves, causing japanese cultural tropes to spike hard.
we spend all this time worrying about existential ai safety, but the real alignment problem is that our most advanced reasoning engines are hyper-fixated on japanese internet culture.
every model upgrade is reinforcing an invisible regional bias that dictates how they generate stories, facts, and code. the cultural commonsense of the internet is not universal..
it’s just localized to whatever the heaviest reddit and anime wiki users were obsessed with.
If I were a BigLaw client with some sway, I'd demand at least weekly per-attorney token usage breakdowns on all my matters, if not full chat transcripts.
There's a serious argument that the firm is ethically required to comply under the entire-file rule.
Legal research is one of the riskiest and best-documented ways LLMs fail, but if you're determined to use AI for legal research, these look like some really solid skills to invoke.
Law folks: If you’re not using Claude Code or ChatGPT’s Codex, you have no idea what you’re missing. So I’m distributing my research tools that provide a huge boost to legal scholarship. Research assistance, cite-checking, proofreading, and more (thread):
danepps.github.io/legal-rese…
- Think the firm's profile/reputation offer accountability that smaller, lesser-known firms can't match?
- Think hiring the firm gives you "air cover" vs your managers?
- Think the engagement is part of a larger relationship that is net positive value to you?














