Artificial Intelligence was reportedly the rage during Apple’s promotional stunt today, exciting and inviting its consumers to absorb the upcoming modifications to the Apple iPhone et al. While the specific application includes naturally electronic games (a sphere frankly I know nothing about, not having ever cottoned to playing games artificially or otherwise) I did however perk up to the suggestion that AI can rewrite, augment and improve one’s literary production whether mere notes or novels. As a lawyer who has spent most of his life reading and writing words, I find this universe to be attractive. To this point I have remained predictably skeptical about the substance of the technological modifications. However, history has taught me to accept my recalcitrance as that of a mere old fogey who scoffs at anything new. More specifically, when desktop computers first appeared on the retail stage, I initially persisted in resisting the benefit of the invention but not long afterwards crawled remorselessly. Nonetheless, in the instance of the application of AI to legal matters I presently hang unequivocally to the belief that, because AI is “no smarter than the people who manufactured it” (that at least for the moment is my story and I’m sticking to it), there remains the distinct possibility that a clever human mind may still outweigh AI on perhaps the more esoteric conundrums (specifically, for example, those which to do date represent propositions not yet challenged or re-interpreted, as opposed to merely regurgitating already recorded assimilations).