Open with the practical frame: this is not an AI hype talk, it is a workflow talk. The question is how to use AI while keeping professional judgment, source review, and accountability intact.
- Sam Carlton - Tulsa native - Been building and consulting on software for over 15 years - VP of Techlahoma w/ Tim - Built products used by NFL, Virgin Brands, Samsung, Aston Martin - Maintain many Open Source projects for the community helping thousands of developers. - Love Grilling, Wagyu, and GrandMA Lighting Consoles.
- Today we're going to explore how AI has taken over the Software Industry - PAUSE - There might be lawyers in the room or online - Under advisement of my legal team I have to put of this disclaimer
- Case & Point: Claude Fable 5. Release on Tue, pulled yesterday at 7:51pm - Backstory: Kate I'm not lawyer
- AI is taking over Software - Finance and legal are next - Kate paid my speaking fee - Finance will just have to be a year yall
- My best effort definition - The lines can be fuzzy
The basics
- Hold back things you already know - Anchor with actual numbers such as: counts - The AI 6 problem
There's so much power
Explain code smells
The more you use these tools you get a feel for when something is off. Lean into that. Interogate the Agent until you feel confident. Mark Manson's video AI Brain video.
Lean into existing summarizing frameworks. - Summaries can give you AI smells early - Worth reading or throw away
- AI will always lie to you eventually - There are tools
- Treat AI as a conduit and never and oracle - Showing you what sources to read is it's superpower
- I will be poisoned
- There are real stakes give them to the AI
Do not let any techniques lull you
- Explain Live Demos and that they always fail - Get 3 OSCN case details from the audience to look up - Review the accuracy with the lawyers
- We can do way more way faster - It's easy to accidentally create useless extra work - It's easy to take longer to get to the same result - Spidering - Lean into one thing at a time
- Lot's of code(or docs) that know human has read much less understands -
- The complete surrender to the Agent's judgment - Tia touched on this with her students - You stop verifying it's outputs - You stop challenging smells
Show of hands - AI has a senior moment
Tie this back to the hard-drive point: reusable context belongs somewhere outside the chat transcript.
Who's familiar with AI Benchmarks? Who's familiar with Legal AI Benchmarks?
- Don't use benchmarks as God's word. - They're just signal help you use your own discernment. - Balance against practitioner's opinions - Sometime it's better to keep using the old tool for a few months
Group these as model or retrieval-model signals. Vals LegalBench is useful for broad model signal. MLEB matters when the workflow depends on retrieval, search, or embeddings rather than chat output. LawBench is jurisdiction-specific, so do not overgeneralize it to U.S. legal work.
Group these as tools, harnesses, workflows, and product-style comparisons. Use them as references, not as a shopping list. Remind the audience to ask what task was measured, what data was used, and whether the benchmark resembles their real work.
Invite questions on workflow, verification, and risk boundaries. If questions are slow, ask: "Where would AI output be hardest for you to verify in your current practice?" Point everyone back to the deck URL for links.
Frame these as starting points, not guarantees. The practical rule: discover through public directories, but inspect source, pin versions, and sandbox before trusting a skill in a real client workspace.
The joke is that local files still matter. Having the right source materials organized and available can be more valuable than chasing a new model. Tie this back to RTFS: AI gets safer when the source set is concrete, available, and reviewable.