Thank you. Hello and welcome to the NVIDIA AI Podcast.
I'm your host, Noah Kravitz. Many years ago a very famous person once wrote, the first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
More recently, a second, rather less famous person said, there are only two checks I don't mind writing each month, one to my lawyer and one to my therapist.
The first line, of course, was penned by William Shakespeare in Henry VI.
It has gone on to be one of the most repeated and possibly misinterpreted lawyer jokes of all time.
The second line? Well, that was from some Silicon Valley entrepreneur whose name I can't remember now, and he said it at some conference I think I watched online, but it's still a pretty good quote.
However you feel about lawyers, they're not going away anytime soon.
Or are they? Between the complexity of our legal systems and the dense technical language used to write the laws themselves, it's virtually impossible for laypeople to navigate contracts or court appearances themselves.
But, and I bet you know where I'm going with this, maybe AI can help.
Our guest today is Shmuley Goldberg, VP of Marketing for LawGeeks.
LawGeeks, and that's spelled L-A-W-G-E-E-X, is an Israeli company with offices in Tel Aviv, and New York City, whose artificial intelligence solution helps legal teams automate the review and approval of contracts.
So I don't think they're looking to kill all the lawyers so much as take some of the grunt work off their plates and help clients execute contracts more efficiently.
But are they here to replace the lawyers with AI?
Let's find out. Shmuley, thank you so much for joining us.
My pleasure. Thank you for having me here.
So let's start with your first things first.
You go to the Law Geeks website, lawgeeks.com, and the headline reads automated contract review.
So let's start there. What is automated contract review?
What does Law Geeks do? And how does AI help you get it done?
So in a nutshell, we are an AI tool which is able to read, understand, review, and often approve everyday legal contracts.
Businesses all around the world use us for that boring, time sensitive, at the same time painstaking task of saying, hey, can I sign this contract?
When you go to a lawyer, you hand them an NDA and you say, hey, can I sign this?
From that point on, the lawyer has to spend time getting that contract reviewed.
You're waiting to move forward with whatever it is that you're waiting to get signed.
And we cut down that time dramatically by using an AI to do that review itself.
To that end, speaking about the time that's saved, you recently published a pretty impressive report detailing the results of what I'm going to call an epic battle between AI and logic.
I think that's an accurate description. So I like to imagine – I've been through a couple of legal – dealings myself.
And so I like to imagine the theater of battle as the courtroom.
So maybe tell us about that battle you ran and use that maybe as a launching point to get into, you know, how the AI works and specifically how much time it saves.
Well, that started about six months ago, when in our labs test, we actually realised that that our AI was getting more accurate than our human lawyers when it came to reviewing these contracts.
Just to give a little bit of background, the way our AI works and the way it's been trained is is by feeding it hundreds of thousands of everyday business contracts.
I mentioned NDAs, service agreements, software licenses, and things like this.
And we've essentially trained using Applied Dual Networks, or AI, to read and understand legalese.
So not natural language. It's not a natural language processing AI like you would imagine.
No, it's not. It's most definitely not.
It's a lot more prescriptive. and it's a lot more rigid.
So while a natural language processor can have one word mean two or three things, or have one thing had been explained in two or three different ways.
With legalese, every word means something specific.
So while that was a more challenging first start for us because we couldn't use standard off the shelf NLP natural language processing tools and apply it to contracts.
We tried that didn't work. When we built our own LLP, legalese language processing, if you will, It's a lot more accurate than a human can be because there's a lot less variance in the meanings behind different sentences.
That would make sense. And from a lay person's perspective, it would stand to reason anyway, that it might, if you were tasked with building an NLP from scratch and an LLP from scratch. the LLP might be a little bit easier actually to construct just because of that rigidity?
I don't know necessarily if it's easier to construct because the amount of training that has to go into is huge and if you imagine with natural language you have an unlimited source of material with LLP it's very very limited But what I would say is once you've constructed it, it can be a lot more accurate than traditional NLP. because there's a lot less variance in the mistakes that can be made.
So I'm looking now at, I deemed it an epic battle, but let's use your term, the ultimate showdown.
This is on your website, lawgeeks.com slash AI versus lawyer.
And it's great because I don't necessarily associate lawyers and contracts with colorful, easy to read infographics with pictures of robots.
But that's what you get on the website. So I appreciate that right off the bat.
But if we're looking at the study, I mean, right off the top accuracy level and your AI. outpaced the lawyers, 94% accuracy to 85% accuracy.
So you trained 20 or trained, you worked with 20 trained lawyers from the U.S.?
? and you pitted them against your AI. And so how'd you come up with these accuracy numbers?
Good question. So this brings us back to the study itself.
So once we have this AI trained up, We wanted to run a real world test to actually see how would we perform when we're head to head with experienced lawyers.
We worked actually together with Duke University, Stanford University, and USC, actually putting together the criteria and the methodology.
And I want to be very clear with what we tasked the lawyers to do.
We gave them five NDAs and we gave them a list of issues, a list of things to find in the contract.
And we said to them very simply, is this in the contract?
Is that in the contract? Or find where in the contract this is, or find where in the contract that is.
We weren't necessarily asking them to make legal decisions or give advice, but just to do that very first thing that needs to be done, which is highlight in the contract these specific issues.
Now, when we gave that to the lawyers, we gave them several hours and a lot of time to sit and do it properly.
And most lawyers took anywhere from 90 minutes plus.
When we gave that same challenge to our AI, where we gave them five contracts, by the way, that had not been seen by our AI.
So they weren't part of any training set. and we gave them that same challenge, we were able to do it in 26 seconds.
That's astonishing. I mean, it's not, right?
If you're used to working with this stuff, but it is looking at the website and that's...
The shortest time taken by a lawyer, according to your infographic, was 51 minutes.
So even... Even getting to that, which is just a little over half the average time, so you're cutting down by almost 50%.
That's still tens of times, hundreds of times slower than the AI, 26 seconds.
That's amazing. And I'm thinking of the next time I get a contract, how much money that could save me if I could just pay the AI by the hour instead of the lawyer.
So please continue. I'm going to jump in with these astonishments that are going to lead me eventually to ask you, can I get rid of my lawyer?
But let's not give that away. just yet.
That's a nice bit of foreshadowing there.
So speed is one thing. And when you're talking about businesses with tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of contracts.
Speed is critical, especially since many lawyers, as you know, charge by the hour.
However, the accuracy also says something important.
It doesn't just tell us that our AI is able to recognize 94% of problems. those issues within the contract.
And by the way, that is what it says. And that's very, very valuable.
For me, the challenge was actually twofold.
Beforehand, when we presented our product to lawyers and we said we hit 94%, Their answer was always, well, what do you guys do about that last 6%?
How can you guarantee 100% accuracy to me?
And this... in a small way was kind of us trying to find out, well, how accurate are lawyers?
If you're telling me that 94% isn't good enough for you, How good is your current system, aka humans?
And what we found out is that the average human, as we've mentioned, scores 85%.
There were humans in the study. There was one human in particular that also reached 94%.
But nobody surpassed it. So the best humans performed equal to our AI, and the majority, or in fact 19 out of 20, were less accurate than the AI, again, for this one specific test.
And I want to say again, we did not ask the lawyers to throw out creative suggestions to fix the contract.
We didn't even ask them to fix the contract.
This was the most basic grunt work that a lawyer does.
There's no creativity involved, no experience required.
It's just read through this contract, find these issues and tell us where they are.
Okay, so let's dig into that a little bit more.
Again, our guest today is Shmuley Goldberg.
He's VP of Marketing with Law Geeks. And we're talking about LawGeek's AI lawyer, I'm going to call it to be sort of. clickbaity, but it's an AI product that can read and process And so we're talking about a study that they ran where they pitted their AI against lawyers to review NDA, nondisclosure fraud. agreements which are traditionally fraught with legalese that's hard for a layperson to digest, hence our need for lawyers.
You're talking about the creativity, and that brings up the question we hinted at a moment ago.
You know, when we talk about AI and we talk about AI in the workplace, there are folks who are, let's say, optimistic that the The advance of AI will help us get the grunt work off of our plates and free us up to do more creative work. creative things, or in my case, more leisurely creative things instead of these tasks that, you know, we can just have the robots do for us.
And then there are folks who have a less optimistic view that basically can be boiled down to the robots are going to take my job and then insert expletive right there.
So let's talk about that, because in reading through some of the materials before getting on the call today, You know, I saw some things pointing to what you just said, that this is scanning these contracts for accuracy is kind of the grunt work and that many of the lawyers you talk to, if I'm remembering correctly, would just as soon have this off their plate so that they can be freed up to do more complex tasks, more creative tasks.
So I'll just ask you straight up. Are you guys looking to put lawyers out of their jobs?
Not at all. I would say the same way that autopilot has put pilots out of their jobs or GPS has put drivers out of their jobs.
I think... What we are looking to do is exactly as you mentioned beforehand, is get rid of the groundwork.
We actually interviewed some of the people that took part in our experiment afterwards.
And we said to them, based on the work you've done just now over the last few hours, If a computer could do this more accurately and faster than you can, would you want that?
And almost everyone said yes. The results were unequivocally, yup, this is stuff that I didn't go to law school for.
This is stuff which I don't enjoy. I don't find this necessarily challenging or rewarding.
I understand it needs to be done. There's a legal risk involved.
So I do it. But if there's a way of overcoming that risk, if there's a way to do this automatically, we would want that.
No lawyer nowadays is going to say, well, I don't trust email.
I'd rather send everything by fax. And if they would, you can argue that they're not being the best lawyer they can because they're not using all the resources available to them.
So I think we've seen two, I would actually say we've seen three reactions from the legal industry.
And don't forget, this is an industry which traditionally is very much doing things the same way for the last 100 years.
A little slow moving, yeah. Possibly you could describe it that way.
You don't have to describe it that way. I'll describe it that way.
And therefore we've had three very surprising reactions.
There's been a small percentage, two or three percent, possibly even less of the people that we speak to. who throw out those type of challenges.
This AI is going to take away my job. Why did I go to law school if I'm going to be replaced?
And the truth is that's not, in my opinion, the right way to think.
No accountant looked at Microsoft Excel.
No accountant looked at a calculator. and said, this is going to take away my job.
They understand that it only does the basics and the human understanding is still critical in the process.
The second group of the three people that we speak to probably account for, I'd say, 40% of the industry. which are people genuinely astonished.
They're astonished either by the fact that the AI is so accurate, or by the fact that humans are so fallible, or by the time that it can potentially save, but they are shocked and surprised that this thing exists and how you know, how capable it is.
And a third, you know, 50% of people that saw this study looked at it and said, But of course, I mean, that just makes sense to me.
And the funny thing is, these are the professionals which kind of are in the weeds every day and aren't writing blogs and art on social media, they're getting on with the tasks at hand.
And they turned around and said, well, yeah, we've known about this for years.
We just didn't think anyone else did. There's a lot of lawyers that think that because they are the technologically advanced lawyers, the generation of legal professionals that grew up on Facebook and Instagram,
Obviously, they're going to be using technology as soon as they can.
But even for them, there was a realization that, okay, this is no longer theoretical.
This is no longer a question of, Well, in theory, a computer or an AI is capable of reading and scanning something better than a human can.
But it's now practical. There are hundreds, if not thousands of people around the world using tools like this every single day.
We have, I think, customers in every single continent. about the Arctic and the Antarctic, and for them to wake up and say, Oh, wow.
Yeah, that makes sense. I can't wait to get my hands on it.
I think that was the biggest reaction we had.
And over the last few weeks since we've sent out this study.
The amount of people that said to us, oh, I've been waiting for this.
I knew this day was going to come. Thank you very much.
I'd love to play with it myself. has been absolutely overwhelming.
We had no idea of how big that subset was.
We thought that would be the minority. We thought that the majority would be kind of like the world is ending and then be a small subset that say, you know what, maybe this could work.
The truth is it's the opposite. And that for us is a very optimistic kind of look as to where the legal industry is going.
That makes sense. Makes sense to me anyway.
So let's shift gears for a moment and back up in time.
How did Law Geeks come to be? How did you get involved?
How was the company founded? Did... Did one of the founders have a parent who was a lawyer and they decided, well, I'm going to rebel against my parents by writing a robot to take their job.
How did this all come to be? I think that would actually be a better story.
So I might tell that one instead. It's yours.
It's free. Thanks a lot. Unfortunately, it's not quite that poetic, although slightly poetic.
Our contract was started by our CEO, who used to be a lawyer, was an international lawyer for many, many years. when he met one of the top AI experts in Israel, and the two of them sat down and, to be frank, had a mind baby. and we're very much like, okay, here is my daily task, which is boring, repetitive, grunt work, and should be automated.
And here is an AI platform, which is finally powerful enough to actually ingest legalese and learn how to speak the language.
And the two of them started about three or four years ago, building the AI, training it, which was a lot of work initially because at the very beginning, just collecting the data and annotating all the data was done manually. which is a lot of work to kind of get those first baby steps into the AI.
I joined about two years ago. My background is exclusively technology.
I've been an evangelist and a tech marketer for a very long time.
My previous companies were either big data companies or AI companies, analytics companies.
I worked with one of the first ever web analytics platforms several years ago, So I've always been working with technology, which is fundamentally hard to explain to people.
That's very much kind of my bread and butter is finding a technology be it big data, be it AI, that has a lot of numbers in it and doesn't really mean much but is exceptionally powerful.
And once it's applied to an everyday task, standing up and screaming from the rooftops what this means for the industry, be it, by the way, the legal industry or the AI industry.
As you're describing this, I'm imagining you just going deeper down the rabbit hole, looking for, well, what's the one industry?
If I can't really explain to people what I'm doing in AI and big data, what's the industry I could work in that would just make it impossible for anybody to understand it?
Oh, legalese. There it is. That's it. You try to talk to a lawyer about applied neural networks.
And the truth is, at first, they might not get what you're talking about But often in this industry, there is a hunger to learn.
There is a belief that innovation is a good thing and change should happen. even if they don't necessarily know what that change is.
And we're seeing, by the way, an explosion right now in legal tech.
There are literally hundreds of startups and more established companies in the legal tech space throwing potential solutions, be them AI, be them big data analytics at challenges to see what sticks.
We're very lucky to have found, you know, one place where AI has definitely stuck.
But there are other companies as well, which are revolutionizing this space.
No, absolutely. And I joked earlier, and I think it was a joke, but it was perhaps unfair to say the legal industry is slow moving.
But I think to your point about having done things the same way, again, in my own very small legal dealings, but in- in pop culture, or if you read news reports about, you know, legal proceedings in any industry, and we're both in tech and there's been a lot of stuff over the past few years with court cases, everything from patents to poaching employees and what have you.
Discovery. just comes up over and over again and contracts and just the time that's spent going into all this.
And then you think about, technology and how between business and technology, efficiency rules the day.
And if you think about it from that standpoint, it would make perfect sense that an industry where there is so much frankly, expensive grunt work being done to read the contracts and process them and make sense of them and look for discrepancies or holes or whatever the words are it it makes a lot of sense to me but that might just be because you're a vp of marketing who does a good job explaining this stuff but um No, it does make a lot of sense.
I'm wondering, you mentioned, you know, the more... tech savvy lawyers who you've worked with.
And I think you said something about, you know, they're being sort of that one of those three groups you described who were kind of saying, well, I knew there was something like this out there, or I knew, I've been using technology, but didn't know this tool exactly existed.
And it makes me wonder, do you have competition?
Is there an Apple out there to law geeks as Microsoft or what have you?
And if there is that you're aware of, how is your approach different?
Good question. So the legal market right now, or more specifically the legal tech market, is absolutely exploding, as I mentioned.
We have no direct competitors yet. I say yet because I'm sure one will come up soon.
At the moment we have no direct competitors and obviously we're going to do everything we can to kind of keep a couple of steps ahead of wherever they are.
But the truth is there is competition in the market just because there are so many companies pains and grunt work within the everyday legal a workload which can be automated.
Everything from, as you mentioned, due diligence to litigation to IP to patents.
So while we have no direct competitors, It's definitely a competitive landscape and a lot of businesses are struggling and beginning to understand themselves what they need to do first.
So if the biggest challenge is litigation, your biggest challenge is then there are tools for that.
So we're competing for wallet against these other legal tech tools.
Even though there's no one right now in the market that can really do what we do.
Over the two years that you've been with the company or the three or so years since...
And I love your term, since the mind baby was born.
What, if anything... learned along the way may have surprised you, either about the technical aspects of building your LLP, legalese language processing training the neural networks or, you know, anything else that pops out from looking back at this journey.
There are two things that have stood out to me.
The first is I initially came from an operations background.
So I mentioned beforehand that I've always been in tech.
My first break into this industry and how I got my first gig here, I was actually an overclock.
So I used to overclock Intel CPUs, NVIDIA GPUs, and build computers for everything from data mining to rendering farms.
Very cool. I had an efficiency and a numbers mindset from day one.
It was all about the 25% increase or the 30% faster increase.
If you could put a hard number on it, then you could judge it, you could measure it, and you can improve it.
And that was been my mindset and everything I've done.
But what I've learned here is a lot of the professionals we speak to, and this is more true five or six years ago, didn't know what their numbers are for them to improve.
When we talk to companies and we're saying at the moment, what's your contract turnaround time?
You know, we're increasing it to X number of minutes.
What is it at the moment? They often don't know.
Is it hours? Is it days? Is it weeks? They're not tracking this stuff.
And in the last... Three or four years, we've seen a boom in something called legal operations.
Legal operations is a term that didn't exist five years ago.
And if you searched five years ago for legal operators on LinkedIn, you wouldn't have got any results.
Right now, there's something like 14 or 15,000 legal operations professionals on LinkedIn.
And these are... larger companies and medium companies as well, waking up to the fact that every other part of their Business has a KPI, has a number, has a target or a goal or an efficiency.
And therefore, sales have their targets.
Finance have their targets. Sure. HR have their targets.
Development has their targets. But legal were just told, do what you need to do to protect this business.
And that's changed. It's no longer a question of it's changing.
It has changed. Now legal... you know, considered responsible for their spend and responsible for their turnaround time and responsible for delivering efficiencies which they've never been asked for before.
And for me, as much as it's a shock that I saw two years ago coming into this industry that these numbers weren't in place.
There was no benchmark. It's amazing to me how quickly this industry has done a complete 180.
And it's really focusing on efficiencies and be it technology, be it process, be it people.
It's like a switch. has been switched to the industry.
And now efficiency is the goal, which five years ago was a buzzword.
Now it's the be all and end all. It's amazing when you see that from the inside.
Once that switch is flipped, like you said, the rate of acceleration can be pretty astounding.
Correct. That was my first big, big shock.
My second big takeaway is... very much that there was a lot of hype around what AI could do.
And coming into this industry, I actually thought the legal tech industry would be There's a lot of people writing about it.
There's a lot of people talking about it.
But when you actually get inside it and you see the practical applications, it's much, much smaller, like any technology when it first comes out.
As it launches, there's everything from excitement and exhilaration to fear and loathing.
And very quickly, that software just becomes part of our daily activity, everything from the smartphone to the GPS.
When it first came out, it was either you loved it or you hated it.
And eventually, it just became a part of your daily toolkit.
And for me, an interesting thing is this industry is much smaller than it first seems.
Yes, there's a lot of legal tech out there.
But the adopters are really working with a small toolkit.
So being in this industry for maybe after six months, I knew every solution out there.
And after a year or two, I'd seen and had hands-on experience with everything the market has to offer.
So there's a lot of hype. There's a lot of talk.
But the practical on the ground use is really just a couple of pieces of software.
Like any other software in the world, we should just use it on a daily basis and become part of that toolkit.
All right, so let's look forward, if we can, to the next five years, 10 years, two years with the rate of change it may be or what have you.
There are a number of things that we touched on in this conversation that I'm thinking of as sort of that gap gap. between what the AI can help with now and what the AI can't help with.
And you mentioned in your battle between the AI versus lawyer that it was scanning for accuracy, but neither the AI or the lawyer in this case study were tasked with revising or rewriting or amending the contracts.
But obviously, that's something that a human lawyer might do after the fact.
What other things are out there that the AI can't help with right now, But might help within the future.
Or maybe a better, broader question is, where's this headed over the next several years?
And in terms of technology, in terms of the impact on what lawyers do or don't do, in terms of the types of clients you're working with. myself being sort of a small business person, kind of solopreneur for a lot of my career, I'm sort of wondering, well, can i create an account and log in with you guys and upload you know the next uh consulting contract that that i need to review you know where's this all headed for law geeks So that's a couple of great questions.
I want to tackle your first two first, which is what's the next thing to be automated?
What currently can't a computer do that I can?
And second of all, where the industry is going.
From my experience, answering that first question is a little bit of a trap. because I think every single person, Bill Gates down, who's made a technology prediction in the last 15 years, Five years later, looks foolish.
You can never predict how quickly a technology is going to infiltrate daily working lives, and automate everyday tasks.
I think if you'd have believed me in 1995, if I would have told you about the iPhone, you'd have been the only one.
Every once in a while, my dad reminds me that back around that same timeframe, I told him the internet was a fad that was going to go away before the year 2000.
Hey, it's still mine. You never know. Regarding the second question, this is probably where I can give the biggest rant.
So I'm going to hold myself back, but I have a fund. mental belief.
Rant away. No holding back. Rant away. I believe strongly, if you look at every single industry over the last 20 years.
In fact, everyone except for legal. has gone through radical change based on automation and based on technology, be it healthcare, be it finance, be it accounting, be it travel, be it retail.
Retail in 1990 to retail in 2015 looked completely different.
Finance in 1990 to finance today in 2018 looks completely different.
And the interesting thing is there are no less jobs available on the market.
The shift is what those jobs are. You know, in the early 90s, you could get a degree or at least you could train up and you could become a travel agent.
Nowadays, nobody becomes travel agents anymore.
What they do is they write websites that sell tickets.
If you look back at the 1920s and the 1930s, there were accountants who spent all day long doing maths by hand on adding machines and other tools to get numbers.
Today, there's a lot less of the accountants that do the actual day-to-day accounting, but there are tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of professionals out there building those accounting software and those tools and writing those processes.
I think the next jobs in legal, and I'm predicting now five or 10 years ahead, which I know is a mistake, as I've just mentioned, but the next job's going to be legal automation experts. and legal software developers, and legal AI experts.
These are the jobs which we're going to see coming up.
So the next breed of lawyers aren't going to go and get a law degree. they're going to go and get a tech degree.
They're going to become developers and researchers.
They're going to be everything from academics to QA. in that legal space.
So the law itself isn't going to change.
And even if it would, it would never change overnight.
But the date day task by the average legal professional, which used to be reading contracts, is now either going to be elevated, so it's going to be making decisions on what those contracts say, or it's going to be shifted significantly into creating software that can improve that contract flow, be it the reading, be it the signing,
Anywhere along that space, there's so much within the legal industry that needs to be revolutionized.
And there are so few people right now in the legal industry that can revolutionize it.
It is exciting to see this next wave of legal experts that don't have law degrees but have computer degrees and have spent years looking at IT infrastructure and applied neural networks. and literally everything from the hardware that it runs on, all the way to Cloud-based optimization. this in my opinion is going to be that next shift and you're going to have law firms instead of having 35 senior lawyers, five name partners, and then 100 first year associates,
They're going to have 35 senior lawyers, five name partners, 100 associates, and then 250
Big data specialists, R&D specialists, automation experts, etc.
That, in my opinion, is where this industry is going.
And if it's up to me, the sooner it gets there, the better.
I think I heard you drop the mic at the end of that.
And so I can't think of anything. there's nothing I can add to make that better that is a perfect spot to land our podcast on Wonderful.
The website is lawgeeks.com, L-A-W-G-E-E-X.com.
Shmuley, if people want to find, they can get to the results.
It's a great infographic. It's really, really nicely done.
It's fun to read. the results of your AI versus lawyer challenge on the website as well.
Anywhere else you would direct people or perhaps more pointedly potential clients to who are interested to see if you offer services that might be of use to them.
Anywhere else they should go or just to the website?
From the start, I'd say yes. Go to our website, ask us any questions you have.
I would recommend spending some time looking at the study.
You said it's AI versus lawyer. If you Google AI versus lawyer, it should be one of the first thing that comes up as well.
And the truth is, as much as I'm very much saying one side of the story, I would strongly encourage any listeners, any readers to look at the other side as well. look at the arguments against AI.
There's a whole bunch of ethical and legal questions that always come up.
And while in other industries, they're more interesting in the legal world that actually has large impact on the day-to-day work.
It's a very interesting debate. It takes a lot of a deep understanding of responsibility to actually kind of see the wood from the trees, so to speak.
But I think any lawyer who wants to stay ahead of that curve has to be up to date on this.
The same way that I would argue that the best pilots today are the ones that know how to use an autopilot best.
And that is my biggest kind of takeaway for lawyers is, Just be aware of where your industry is going, look at the options available, understand the arguments fallen against so that not just you can make an educated decision, when decisions are made either by individuals or just by the industry as a whole, you're up to date on those issues.
Always, always good to be up to date. Absolutely.
Shmuley Goldberg, thank you so much for your time, for joining the podcast.
And thank you to listening to the NVIDIA AI podcast.
We will see you next time. Shmuley, take care.
Thank you.
