You do realize we are talking about to entirely different areas of the justice system don't you. You are talking property and I am talking Criminal
Okey dokey.
Then we disagree, and I'm ok with that, And I have no intention of trying to change your mind on this
Good.
This isn't a debate forum, & staff are just
itching to rap knuckles over such a violation.
Rather have that than have a guy sentenced to life in prison, who did not actually do the crime, do to other issues in the system. Not ready to throw all responsibility for my actions, or any other humans actions to AI just yet. And can it be changed in an appeal if the defendant is dead? Or if the defendant lost everything due to a faulty judgement all because we wanted to be free of blame and from taking responsibility
I too oppose leaving responsibility up to AI.
But an AI analysis & judgment can provide a cheap & possibly
convincing argument that finalizes an issue. In case I haven't
mentioned it, the right to appeal a decision is still there.
My background and past training is at this level and again, we do not agree. I think think electronic judges at this level would be far more detrimental than helpful and wold not offset the bad judges in the system at all. Also take into account where those laws come from, a change, by a political human would then allow for no interpretation by a judge and only allow for the preprogrammed judgement of a computer
If the AI rendered decision is found wanting, then it
can be appealed. At that stage, those pesky humans
can enter the fray.
Again a disagreement, I don't see it as riddled with "fallible & corrupt humans" at the level of the court. Now where meny of those laws originate and are passed, that is another story and a robo-judge would not fix that issue. It would just give that level more power and authority and remove the nuisance they have of a judge that can interpret differently
Human judges typically enforce bad laws.
So that's a problem in any system.
Bad law
can be addressed by a jury, but beware.
Even though jury nullification (ie, finding a defendant not guilty
by reason of an unjust law) is our right, to admit it can get a juror
prosecuted.
Can I Go to Jail for Jury Nullification? | Flex Your Rights
But I am also not dooming the system, neither should you doom the currently system based on real estate court issues.
Dooming?
As the title says, it's about "hope for better justice".
Big difference from wining a game and judging a persons to lif in prison or death. Also a big difference from programming a computer to make moves and come up with moves on a board than programing in copious laws and then expecting the program it to come up with new and amazing interpretations of those laws. (don't believe me, take a look a a book of criminal procedure law, or for that matter Vehicle and traffic laws, there are tons of them to varying degrees of level and charge) And I am not joking here, you do have a engineer's POV, this comes as no surprise, and that is good in many things, but in this however I do not feel that view is the one to follow.
I chose go (as opposed to a simple game like chess) because
it's long been a classic milestone in AI maturity. AlphaGo
signaled capability to face the complexity of law & human
action.
Note that this won't happen overnite. I expect decades of
development before we see widespread use in Ameristan.
And as with many things today, I do not feel that everything should be evaluated in the terms of time and cost.
You might feel otherwise if you spent as much money & time
in court as I have, & personally witnessed the slowly grinding
gears of corruption & incompetence.
The system has problems, many of those crated by the politicians who pass the laws they come up with. A robo-judge will not fix that, only give them more control since there is no other voice to argue for or against. And I do not think dehumanizing the legal system is the proper approach, nor do I think it will make it better, I do feel it will create a lot more guilty sentences, thereby sending more to prison, some admittedly deservedly so, thereby overloading an already overloaded system and based on that alone there are no cost savings, only more expenses. My view ,when we are talking human lives, I am no so sure it should be treated like a commodity with concerns of time and cost.
And now at the prison level....there is corruption in that system, do we then replace guards and wardens with robots.....how about police.....fixing the problems in any "human" system are not easy. It takes a lot of people with the drive to do it to fix it. Sadly today I have little faith that there are enough to take on that fight in any of these 'Human" systems. To many looking for a quick and easy solution, how to make the most money, gain the most power and to many willing to listen to be told what to think.... butI do not think a robo-judge is anything more than greater addition to that overall problem, not a solution...at least not for a long, long time.
And then there are hackers, nation state hackers with virtually unlimited resources. They try and influence our elections, what make you think they would nto try and influence our laws. We're are behind the 8 ball in may of the IT security systems at the government in some rather surprising areas. Again, don't think a robo-judge is a good idea at an IT security level either
We do not agree, we will not agree and I do not plan on expending a whole lot of time in a back and forth showing you the evil of your ways while you in turn try and show me the evil in mine, whilst we both spin our wheels going no where as the great keyboard warriors of anonymity we are.
To argue against AI assisted justice is the same as arguing
against computer assisted design, manufacturing, weather
prediction, scientific research, etc. This tool produces useful
results.
