Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court

cbsnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 174 posts

Re: AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court

#111

Post by KaiserPro »

pibechorro wrote: post #109
ausbah wrote: post #6

>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…

Its a state created problem and you expect them to solve it? Private entities are the way these problems are always solved efficiently. Cant wait for lawyers to be obsolete personally.

So wait, lawyers are state entities?

Re: AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court

#112

Post by elicksaur »

Attorney here, I think it’s too early stages to run with this tech. It’s not just the confidentially incorrectness people have mentioned. If you ask it for legal citations for an argument, it makes them up because it has no concept of truth to filter on. Make all the jokes you want about lawyers stretching the truth, but citing State v. Johnson, (Minn. 2007) when that doesn’t exist is going to be bad for the individual. The average person also likely isn’t going to be able to recover from such a flub if they are relying on the AI to tell them what to say. They may double down because “that’s what the AI says” which will make things worse for them.

I’ll also throw out the libertarian posturing of DoNotPay seems shortsighted. Sure, it might be all fine for awhile as individuals move faster than the system and gain an upper hand, but when the Comcast Customer Service Rep is replaced with the tech, that benefits only the shareholders. If you thought customer service calls were insufferable before, imagine an indefatigable, perpetually nice adversary out to screw you over.

Re: AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court

#113

Post by ourmandave »

elicksaur wrote: post #112

Attorney here, I think it’s too early stages to run with this tech. It’s not just the confidentially incorrectness people have mentioned. If you ask it for legal citations for an argument, it makes them up because it has no concept of truth to filter on. Make all the jokes you want about lawyers stretching the truth, but citing State v. Johnson, (Minn. 2007) when that doesn’t exist is going to be bad for the individu…

... an indefatigable, perpetually nice adversary out to screw you over.

So you've met my ex.

Re: AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court

#114

Post by omginternets »

meowkit wrote: post #54
fasthands9 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I agree that technology is the solution I disagree AI has anything to do with this. This "AI Lawyer" is about a traffic ticket. If we want to make things more fair while also enforcing the laws on the book it seems like the more straightforward tech solution is to improve traffic cameras/monitors such that tickets are given out more appropriately. Or, if it still goes to court, why not just have a system where…

Normative statements. You should be asking what are the incentives. > like the more straightforward tech solution is to improve traffic cameras/monitors such that tickets are given out more appropriately This is not straightforward from a bureaucratic sense. There is no strong incentive (that I can identify - humanitarian ideals do not count) to improve the functionality here to make traffic tickets and their resolut…

> Normative statements. You should be asking what are the incentives.

This is itself a normative statement.

I’m of the opinion that incentives aren’t the only thing worth considering — there’s something to be said for enshrining ethics into law (if only because it can adjust incentives).

Another thing worth considering is our mediocre track record of identifying incentives ahead of time.

Re: AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court

#115

Post by pontifier »

perihelions wrote: post #95
ausbah wrote: post #6

>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…

It could also make things much worse, due to Jevon's paradox. The way rich societies throw away tons of food because it isn't scarce, or how modern software is slower than ever because hardware is too cheap. If half-baked AI's lower *some* of the costs of law practice, we might end up wasting more resources than ever before fighting against the proliferating volume of it. See, the sword cuts both ways. Prosecutors' o…

I'm imagining a dystopian future where everyone wears a legal advice headset that is constantly whispering to them about things they are doing, or need to change to avoid a lawsuit. Kind of like a continual game of twister where if you misstep, all the watching legal AIs jump on you, immediately serving you electronically, with court dates pre-scheduled and all the evidence they need to win the case already submitted.

Re: AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court

#116

Post by PurpleRamen »

ranger47 wrote: post #94
PurpleRamen wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this a social problem? Lawyers are expensive, because education takes time, motivation and competence. So it's an economical problem, something the state can't easily solve. Technology can make an impact here and sidestep or even ignore those problems.

Can it be a socio-economic problem? Do universities that these lawyers study at really need to be as expensive as they are?

Education is always expensive, in every country, because it takes time. US-Universities are just exceptional expensive for whatever reasons. But time is something that this technology can remove for this cases, so I would say it still remains an economical problem.

Though, the ability to use the technology might come down to a social problem. Because it still needs a certain level of education and competence to use the technology. Just significant less than visiting a university for a whole decade or so.

Re: AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court

#118

Post by enkid »

perihelions wrote: post #95
ausbah wrote: post #6

>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…

It could also make things much worse, due to Jevon's paradox. The way rich societies throw away tons of food because it isn't scarce, or how modern software is slower than ever because hardware is too cheap. If half-baked AI's lower *some* of the costs of law practice, we might end up wasting more resources than ever before fighting against the proliferating volume of it. See, the sword cuts both ways. Prosecutors' o…

Is modern software really slower or are we just noticing when it is slow because we're used to it being fast? I am genuinely asking.

Re: AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court

#119

Post by comfypotato »

elicksaur wrote: post #112

Attorney here, I think it’s too early stages to run with this tech. It’s not just the confidentially incorrectness people have mentioned. If you ask it for legal citations for an argument, it makes them up because it has no concept of truth to filter on. Make all the jokes you want about lawyers stretching the truth, but citing State v. Johnson, (Minn. 2007) when that doesn’t exist is going to be bad for the individu…

Any insight on how the planes keep the Wi-Fi going? If the cell service internet provider’s handoff speed is too slow, does that mean they’re doing satellite internet in-flight? It was mentioned in the article that the tech has won some legal arguments regarding in-flight Wi-Fi refunds. (When the paid-for service didn’t work.)
Post reply on HN