Can we get AI to help us find loopholes in bureaucracy that plutocrats try to exploit in order to keep the working classes down?
Because that's something Ian Banks would smile at, from wherever he is rest his soul.
AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court
21–30 of 174 posts
Re: AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court
#22>The ultimate goal, according to Browder, is to democratize legal representation by making it free for those who can't afford it, in some cases eliminating the need for pricey attorneys. this is the core issue I have with companies and tech like this: they try to solve social issues with technology and business. the issue of accessible defense is an issue of institutional failure that rests on the shoulders of the st…
I disagree. Technology is the perfect solution for problems like these. So many societal issues today arise because systems developed centuries ago cannot keep up with a population that has grown exponentially since then. Tech's core feature is being able to scale. There will be more and more systemic reliance on automation and AI as time goes on, since that's the only sensible way out.
But the problem with law isn't the number of people, it's with the number of laws/binding contracts. If the US government can't even count the number of possible ways you can commit a crime then how is any of it supposed to work?
Re: AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court
#23>The ultimate goal, according to Browder, is to democratize legal representation by making it free for those who can't afford it, in some cases eliminating the need for pricey attorneys. this is the core issue I have with companies and tech like this: they try to solve social issues with technology and business. the issue of accessible defense is an issue of institutional failure that rests on the shoulders of the st…
Nitpick: From a glimpse at the article, I think the defendant will represent himself , the "AI lawyer" running on the defendants smartphone will just give him hints. Not sure how it can be acceptable to have a third party listen into court proceedings in real time through a smartphone, but ok.
> The AI lawyer tells the defendant what to say in real-time, through headphones.
Yeah - and I wonder what will happen if it starts telling the defendant to say things which aren't grounded and rooted in fact, or which contradict things they previously said or submitted in writing.
Not sure a generative model is the best way to keep people clear of obvious cases of perjury/lying under oath etc.
Re: AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court
#24>The ultimate goal, according to Browder, is to democratize legal representation by making it free for those who can't afford it, in some cases eliminating the need for pricey attorneys. this is the core issue I have with companies and tech like this: they try to solve social issues with technology and business. the issue of accessible defense is an issue of institutional failure that rests on the shoulders of the st…
I disagree. Technology is the perfect solution for problems like these. So many societal issues today arise because systems developed centuries ago cannot keep up with a population that has grown exponentially since then. Tech's core feature is being able to scale. There will be more and more systemic reliance on automation and AI as time goes on, since that's the only sensible way out.
The notion that monolithic tech actually scales is not a given. The strategy typically used to disrupt an industry is to provide a convenience for free that actually costs the company something. These costs (and liabilities) are familiar to the incumbent.
That institutional knowledge disappears upon a successful disruption. The startup will now be faced with learning these things over again, “breaking things” in the process.
Once enough growth has happened, monetizing via ads or increased pricing occurs. After this, you may have to squint your eyes a bit to tell if the situation before was all that much worse- or merely consisted of a different set of trade-offs.
Uber comes to mind. Facebook as well.
Re: AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court
#25>The ultimate goal, according to Browder, is to democratize legal representation by making it free for those who can't afford it, in some cases eliminating the need for pricey attorneys. this is the core issue I have with companies and tech like this: they try to solve social issues with technology and business. the issue of accessible defense is an issue of institutional failure that rests on the shoulders of the st…
I disagree. Technology is the perfect solution for problems like these. So many societal issues today arise because systems developed centuries ago cannot keep up with a population that has grown exponentially since then. Tech's core feature is being able to scale. There will be more and more systemic reliance on automation and AI as time goes on, since that's the only sensible way out.
I think that's utopian, all i see in this story is a future where some people can afford expert defendants (who'll be assisted by AI but much more effective than AI alone), while poor people are stuck with representing themselves with an app - and the government deems the problem solved, further eroding laws that guarantee legal support.
Re: AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court
#26No it won't since it's illegal.
"At no time at any location within the courthouse may any electronic device be used to make a photograph or recording in any fashion, whether audio, video or otherwise."
https://www.lawd.uscourts.gov/possession-and-use-electronic-...
Re: AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nitpick: From a glimpse at the article, I think the defendant will represent himself , the "AI lawyer" running on the defendants smartphone will just give him hints. Not sure how it can be acceptable to have a third party listen into court proceedings in real time through a smartphone, but ok.
> The AI lawyer tells the defendant what to say in real-time, through headphones. Yeah - and I wonder what will happen if it starts telling the defendant to say things which aren't grounded and rooted in fact, or which contradict things they previously said or submitted in writing. Not sure a generative model is the best way to keep people clear of obvious cases of perjury/lying under oath etc.
Yes. If its one thing we've seen ChatGPT and the like struggling with, it's internal consistency and keeping the whole text coherent and tied to some fundamental overarching thread or strategy.
To play devil's advocate though, would a layman without AI help be any better at navigating this?
Re: AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court
#28> the company's AI-creation runs on a smartphone, listens to court arguments and formulates responses for the defendant. The AI lawyer tells the defendant what to say in real-time, through headphones. Based on AI’s propensity for being confidently incorrect, I’m not sure I’d want to be repeating AI output in a court of law and representing it as truth.
What if it turns out to be an actual lawyer doing the answer on the other side of the phone?
Then I imagine the defendant would risk enjoying a stretch in jail for contempt of court, for creating an unauthorized recording or live "streaming" of the court?
I'm not even convinced by the idea of having a person repeat what they hear through headphones - something like this could easily slow proceedings down, and that's without even going into whether or not the AI can stick to a consistent and accurate set of facts.
Re: AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. Technology is the perfect solution for problems like these. So many societal issues today arise because systems developed centuries ago cannot keep up with a population that has grown exponentially since then. Tech's core feature is being able to scale. There will be more and more systemic reliance on automation and AI as time goes on, since that's the only sensible way out.
I think that's utopian, all i see in this story is a future where some people can afford expert defendants (who'll be assisted by AI but much more effective than AI alone), while poor people are stuck with representing themselves with an app - and the government deems the problem solved, further eroding laws that guarantee legal support.
I mean, if the AI app is better than public defenders, it’s still progress. Rich people can already afford experts, so the inequality would be lessened.
Re: AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nitpick: From a glimpse at the article, I think the defendant will represent himself , the "AI lawyer" running on the defendants smartphone will just give him hints. Not sure how it can be acceptable to have a third party listen into court proceedings in real time through a smartphone, but ok.
> The AI lawyer tells the defendant what to say in real-time, through headphones. Yeah - and I wonder what will happen if it starts telling the defendant to say things which aren't grounded and rooted in fact, or which contradict things they previously said or submitted in writing. Not sure a generative model is the best way to keep people clear of obvious cases of perjury/lying under oath etc.
Well, INAL, but during the legal interactions I had, none of which was in the US or got to actual trial, whenever the clients didn't follow the legal guidance of the lawyer, the lawyer was not accountable. Heck, even if you follow your lawyer's advice, the lawyer isn't accountable for the outcome. Only for the correct conduct of his practice. So I'd say, in this AI-supported court case (for speeding ticket after all), if the AI screws up I think the defendant is on its own. Or we see a follow up civil suite against the "AI" provider, which would be both, hilarious and highly interesting.