It probably can, assuming that a bill can be separated into smaller parts, more or less independent of each other. Trusting the summary is another story.

But expecting people to read 4000 pages in 3 days and make informed decisions after that is unrealistic, regardless of whether they are using lossy untrusted compression tools like ChatGPT.

"Trusting the summary is another story." What story could we possibly be interested in that involves having chat GPT read a bill but we don't care about a summary of it being accurate?

Add an intern in the loop that feeds every chapter separately and then compiles per-chapter summary that can then be summarized again if it is too long or has too many interdependencies.

And with most bills I've read, the devil is 100% in the details. Of those 4000 pages, it might just be one sentence that has far reaching ramifications. Alternatively, folks will start maliciously crafting bills in a way that the ChatGPT summary misses the key parts.

The new SEO will be LEO :)

(AIO sounds less catchy)

Maybe LLEO or LLMEO as LEO is already semi-widely known as Law Enforcement Officer.

That's less of a GPT problem and more of a human problem: bills/contracts/T&Cs/ToS have all been massively blown out because: * Companies need to cover every minute detail/situation to prevent getting boned, especially in America where your citizens will sue at the drop of a hat * Companies want to purposefully bulk out the contract so that most people don't bother reading it

super trivial actually. Just tokenize the document using Llama index and pass the vectorization instead.