Consumer Fraud How AI Is Transforming Modern Data Analysis Workflows

rom_c

New Member
Jurisdiction
Delaware
Hi everyone,

I've been noticing a shift in how teams approach data analysis lately, especially as environments continue to grow in size and complexity. With the amount of logs, metrics, and events we generate daily, traditional methods like manual queries, dashboards, and static alerts don't always scale the way we expect. We often spend more time searching through data than actually acting on insights.

This is where AI is starting to change the workflow in a meaningful way.

Instead of relying only on predefined rules, AI-driven systems can learn patterns from historical data and automatically identify what looks normal versus what looks unusual. That makes it easier to detect anomalies early, sometimes before users even notice an issue. It also reduces the need to constantly fine-tune thresholds or write complex searches for every scenario.

Another big improvement is speed. AI can correlate information across multiple sources much faster than a person manually piecing things together. During investigations, this helps narrow down potential causes quickly and shortens troubleshooting time. Less time digging through raw data means more time solving real problems.

AI also helps cut down noise. By prioritizing meaningful signals and filtering repetitive alerts, teams can focus their attention where it matters most. This reduces alert fatigue and improves overall efficiency.

To me, the goal isn't automation replacing analysts, but supporting them. Think of AI as an assistant that highlights patterns, suggests next steps, and handles repetitive tasks so we can focus on decision-making.

As data volumes keep growing, adopting smarter, AI-assisted workflows feels like a practical step toward working faster, more accurately, and more proactively. Curious to hear how others are adapting their processes.
 
This site is specifically about legal issues, and we're happy to discuss those that impact AI, which also has impacted this site. Some of the challenges include the terms of use which explicitly forbid the use of our content by machines, such as what LLMs are doing by having crawled this website and then taking our content for use in their services - without compensating us.

The fatigue is in watching more open Internet content sites like ours closing their content and making it only available to registered users. The steal intellectual property now and ask for forgiveness later approach is threatening our existence to continue to provide useful, interactive live assistance like we do here.

AI in law can be a devastating mistake, especially since it can "hallucinate" by being very confident about an incorrect answer. I know a well known politician and lawyer who was embarrassed by using an LLM to generate a legal response and citing case law which did not exist.

So in short, AI may be a useful tool in certain circumstances but let the user beware when overreliance on that tool has unintended consequences. It will be interesting to see how the law and our legislature treats the impact of LLMs and Artificial Intelligence scraping the intellectual property of others to use in selling their own services without compensating the content creators who put the substantive intelligence into the AI.
 
AI in law can be a devastating mistake, especially since it can "hallucinate" by being very confident about an incorrect answer. I know a well known politician and lawyer who was embarrassed by using an LLM to generate a legal response and citing case law which did not exist.

Like any tool, one should throughly understand how it works and how to properly use it before jumping in to use it. Lawyers in particular should understand that. Unfortunately, the AI has come on so fast that everyone seems to be afraid if they don't jump on the bandwagon they'll get left behind. Clients are expecting their lawyers to use AI to cut down on the cost of legal expenses, which is part of the pressure for lawyers to use it before they understand it. My state and others have started to regulate how lawyers may use AI in their practices. The start is fairly modest. My state now requires disclosure to a client of any potential use of AI, the type of AI to be used, and for what purposes. My state also prohibits a lawyer from charging time that the task would have taken to do a task when AI was used to cut down the actual time spent. (That one should not have to be said, but I guess there are already instances of that occurring.)

Clients who press their lawyers to use LLM AI like Chat GPT, Open AI, and Claude need to understand why in most cases it's not a good idea. Any private information put into those AI chat programs may then end up being used in supplying answers to other people with the result that confidentiality gets breached. AI is not the answer to everything. The skill of the lawyer is still very much needed. I expressly state in my disclosures that I do not use those LLM programs and why. The AI I use is more narrowly focused on a specific set of tasks, like aiding in legal research, or assistance in drafting template letters. That's the kind of AI use clients should expect to see. The LLM AI programs are not ready to use as a substitute for a lawyer's expertise.

Also, everytime I see "LLM" the first thing I think of is the LL.M degree (Master of Laws). Most tax lawyers get a LL.M - Taxation. It's one of the few areas of law where that degree is pretty much mandatory. I wish they'd have come up with a different name for those AI programs than "Large Language Model". :(
 
Back
Top