31–40 of 119 posts
Does someone now where the stunning photo of a library was taken?
Another view of it: http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblioteca_civica_di_Stoccarda#... - it looks positively Kubrickian.
The best part is, e-Trial never gets it wrong.
This sort of device is only applicable for very specific areas of "law". It may work for generalized law questions, retrieval of known legal principals, or even for electronic discovery (data mining) but once you get beyond law school there is a human element. I would like to see a machine come up with a novel means of describing a realworld legal situation. Ask him to determine whether John Stewart's use of media fr…
Why is this being downvoted? It's a perfectly reasonable comment.
This is a good 80/20 solution. 80% of the value of the attorney for (less than) 20% of the effort/cost.
I run lawdingo.com. Any ideas on how we could use this?
Couple of my friends that work for IBM told me that it still needs a lot of work because researchers that take blind tests can almost always tell apart the cold, inhuman responses that are devoid of any human decency from the responses generated by the computer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hope I can see the day when the justice system is run completely by benevolent AI. Legislative too, for that matter, and at least partially the executive functions of government as well, while we're at it, including law enforcement.
Welcome to The Matrix, Neo.
This is a good 80/20 solution. 80% of the value of the attorney for (less than) 20% of the effort/cost.
Since lawyers bill in hours they either have to raise their hourly bill or lie about the hours spend in order to keep the final price tag the same.
If the law is getting too complex for humans to handle, the solution is not to create supercomputers that help us. The solution should be to simplify the law.
