- understand your questions,
- respond with a hypothesis backed by references and citation.
So, it is the practice of law, right?
What if the answering person is a robot?
And that robot does the very same thing as I described above?
And, if the valuable "judgment of a lawyer" can be assigned to a machine, what is the whole big thing about licensing?
If people can just ask a machine that is crammed with artificial intelligence to search the world-wide-web and come up with references of the law in a certain jurisdiction and solutions of any legal question.
And why do we need human judges then, with their inflated and ever growing salaries, benefits, entitlements and an entourage of families and friends who they serve - if machines can be better, quicker, fairer, cannot lose temper with you and cannot be corrupted?
For example, robot Ross, if put on the bench, will certainly not seek to spank young male nude criminal defendants and take their nude pictures for later enjoyment.