AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court • Hacker News Board

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

#171

Post by tptacek » Wed, Jan 11, 2023, 1:46 AM UTC

phpisthebest wrote: post #153

jcranmer wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One example off the top of my head is when Lawyers attempt aurge that social media platforms are both publishers and platforms so they can not be held liable at all under any circumstance ... that would be very surprising, since there is no legal definition nor distinction of publisher or platform.

Yes there is.

No, there isn't.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/07/29/stubborn-n...

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/12/publisher-or-platform-...

https://www.techdirt.com/2020/10/20/section-230-basics-there...

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/it-doesnt-matter-if-tw...

https://www.cato.org/blog/newspapers-are-spreading-section-2...

Even TechDirt manages to get this right, but the myth that tech companies exist on the knife's edge of being converted under the law into publishers is stubborn.

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

#172

Post by TomSwirly » Wed, Jan 11, 2023, 12:03 PM UTC

notch656c wrote: post #135

jtbayly wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why do we need lawyer of any type to handle something as banal as speeding tickets? You don't. Just show up in court and talk to the judge. That's how it's currently handled. Lawyers aren't involved in the traffic courts I've seen.

I always hire a lawyer for traffic court. Show up with a lawyer and wear a suit. Don't want them to think I'm one of the poors to stomp down. If you go to low-level court in middle America you'll understand what I mean -- 99% of the people there are drugged out and wearing rags generally look like their shit is not together at all and these are the people the lazy/burnt-out prosecutor is geared towards crushing effor…

> I always hire a lawyer for traffic court.

"Always"? I have never ended up in traffic court.

> Bring on the hate. Y'all know I speak truth.

Who would doubt that you are the antisocial person you portray yourself as?

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

#173

Post by YeGoblynQueenne » Wed, Jan 11, 2023, 1:05 PM UTC

apaprocki wrote: post #149

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…

> imagine an indefatigable, perpetually nice adversary out to screw you over. That's already the case on a lot of calls. In particular, the systems that are configured to not hand you over to a human no matter what unless the system itself detects there is an error in its handling of the situation. I've just defaulted for some time now to saying the word "gibberish" when prompted, and usually that gets you connected…

"Gibberish"? That's smart. I just blow raspberries down the phone until it says "I'll put you through to an assistant". But sometimes it thinks it found some signal in the noise and it will say things like "is this about your credit card? Please say yes or no".

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

#174

Post by Aerroon » Sat, Jan 14, 2023, 5:53 PM UTC

torstenvl wrote: post #170

Aerroon wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is that a lay person has to follow all of the laws. The only reason this system works is because of privacy. Without it the system is just broken. But even with privacy it makes the system about luck.

> a lay person has to follow all of the laws That is obviously untrue. Why do you feel the need to make obviously false claims to support your position? You need to obey the UCMJ? You need to obey campaign finance laws? You need to obey the Stop Trading On Congressional Knowledge Act? You need to obey state law as incorporated by the Assimilative Crimes Act in jurisdictions you've never been to? You need to obey HIPA…

You need to be aware of that before making decisions in life though. You also need to be aware of them to know how others around you can legally act.

Also, there's the problem that you don't know what is written in the laws that you don't know. Maybe it does pertain to you, but without knowing the law you can't know that.