There's another factor here: There's a huge swath of services that private insurance companies outright will not, under any circumstances, cover. They are explicitly exempted from having to cover these things specifically because they are technically available through Medicaid. This very much includes critical things like long-term caregivers/assistive devices. So having access to Medicaid becomes extremely important as soon as you need any of those services.
His supervisor was given a $20k bonus with a performance review that specifically cited that "Don Sanders is no longer working for BNSF." Insane that there are no criminal penalties for this nonsense, just penny fines absorbed by the company.
The culture doesn't allow it. If you don't publish enough, in prestigious enough journals, instead of tenure you get replaced. That's one reason this is a pretty interesting move - by providing an alternative publishing location based on principles that the universities supposedly value, this sort of departure _could_ help push the academic culture toward a less-abusive publishing model. Institutional change is hard.
> That's the lawyer's job, to guide you through ! If they're not doing that, then find a different lawyer.
Yes! And if you happen to know that, and have a good lawyer, then you're all set. But a hell of a lot of lawyers won't volunteer to do this, or aren't competent enough to have this conversation productively with a layperson, and most people don't know to ask for it.
I have my doubts as to the practicality, but a tool that could summarize and then prompt laypeople go to their lawyer to start that discussion seems like it could definitely have value. I suspect most people interested in this tool may already be knowledgeable enough to ask for a walkthrough anyway, but you could imagine implementations where the summary is presented directly, and could guide more people toward the help they need.
Given how _poorly written_ a lot of real legal documents are, I would definitely not trust any current AI to summarize it accurately. How would it handle documents where terms or clauses are in conflict, or any other situation where a close-reading human would have to step back and say "okay, this is _semantically_ impossible?"
I could see a tool like this being valuable as an outline generator for long documents, but I would be very reluctant to believe any statements it makes about the actual legal effects.