Automated Justice

As ever more automation works its way into our legal system and courts, we must ask what challenges and advantages AI has in justice, and if AI will come to be our judge and jury.
Watch my exclusive video Crystal Aliens nebula.tv/videos/isaacarthur-...
Get Nebula using my link for 40% off an annual subscription: go.nebula.tv/isaacarthur
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @isaacarthursfia
Visit our Website: www.isaacarthur.net
Join Nebula: go.nebula.tv/isaacarthur
Support us on Patreon: / isaacarthur
Support us on Subscribestar: www.subscribestar.com/isaac-a...
Facebook Group: / 1583992725237264
Reddit: / isaacarthur
Twitter: / isaac_a_arthur on Twitter and RT our future content.
SFIA Discord Server: / discord
Credits:
Automated Justice
Episode 438a; March 17, 2024
Produced & Narrated by: Isaac Arthur
Written by: Isaac Arthur & Mark Warburton
Editors: Dillon Ollander & Konstantin Sokerin
Music Courtesy of:
Epidemic Sound epidemicsound.com/creator
Frank Dorittke, "Morninglight"
Stellardrone, "A Moment of Stillness", "Blinking Star"
Sergey Cheremisinov, "Labyrinth",
Aerium, "Deiljocht"
Lombus, "Cosmic Soup", "Hydrogen Sonata"
Chapters
0:00 Intro
1:20 The justice system structure
03:46 Challenges
8:11 Sci-fi tropes
9:16 Current use of AI in law
10:52 Roles in the justice system
15:29 Expert role
17:24 Hearing role
18:17 Auditor Role
19:09 Where and how does AI fit in?
25:59 An example case
37:59 Analysis
42:43 Human judges
44:28 AGI

[@UpliftedCapybara]

Next sci-fi Sunday: Is the KZbin Algorithm Ethical? 😂

[@JohnSagin-SimViDeLucis579]

"Is yourube defrauding you revenue on purpose with false copywrite claims?"

[@cosmictreason2242]

@@JohnSagin-SimViDeLucis579that, and the other huge issue is their automated comment sensirshp

[@BlimeyOreiley]

Let’s just hope that the algo doesn’t become judge, jury and executioner.

[@trdscfjc]

Susan Wojcicki"s son tried to search KZbin "how to stop accidental fentanyl overdose" he got nothing but ads.(probably)

[@davidsquier4474]

It would be hard for him to spend 40 minutes saying no

[@zyfigamer]

Biggest problem right now, AI straight up lies when you ask it for information! Funny that the stereotype used to be that a robot would be incapable of lying.

[@thekaxmax]

For large language model AI, yes. But not all AI is LLM, and the non-LLM ones are very accurate.

[@vincentcleaver1925]

I'd say we taught it to pretend to be human, so you get lying, fake facts, etc. If we accept approximations, we get garbage

[@vincentcleaver1925]

We taught ai that. We accept applications, we get garbage

[@8darktraveler8]

For an AI that would just need to reference crime and the punishment, it would be very simple. AI Judge: Crime is X punishment is X. Rich person: I think you don't understand your honor, I'm rich! AI Judge: Bribery is a crime, punishment has now been adjusted. Rich person: But... I'm rich...

[@lomiification]

​@@thekaxmaxthey're only accurate within the confines of their training set though. Give them something outside of it, and they'll be wildly wrong

[@tehbonehead]

I have nothing BUT contempt for this court! Feed him to the Sharkticons!

[@Kargoneth]

Innocent. Innocent. Innocent. Feed him to the sharkticons!

[@mattstorm360]

@@KargonethI find you guilty! Of nothing. The sentence is feed him to the sharkticons.

[@SickPrid3]

hasn't this been tried already in USA? There was some pretty loud case about some court using algorithms to decide whether defendant should be granted bail? Some guy got denied release without bail, which was standard occurrence for first time offenders. The bail was set by algorithm to some hundreds of thousands of dollars...because there was another guy with the same name in the system who was a convicted killer, already in prison. Judge did not bother to double check anything the computer spit out.

[@cosmictreason2242]

They record our SS birth date and address and still can't keep this shit straight

[@captainferrite]

Yep, black box algorithms are already widespread in US courts and basically amount to deciding bail and guilty plea offers based on past cases, ie. systemic reproduction of systemic racism.

[@SlowRkers]

@@cosmictreason2242 For that one can't blame the algo, as bad database it was using was provided by humans.

[@maxpayne2574]

My point exactly oversight will become a rubber stamp quickly

[@JankyBruv]

As someone who has been wrung through our judicial system and seen just how unjust it is. I can confirm that we might as well be there now.

[@samuelmatheson9655]

A normal person might actually have better chances with an A.I., lol

[@starshot5172]

Yeah. Me too. I pretty much used the autism card and got a smaller penalty. Such BS, not justice. But I'm glad it all worked out fine

[@jtjames79]

“The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly." -- Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter.

[@billbadson7598]

@@samuelmatheson9655 _"A normal person might actually have better chances with an A.I."_ If it looks for even a moment like a normal person will benefit from impartial justice, it will be stopped IMMEDIATELY. The legal (not justice) system is intended as a less violent means of keeping the downtrodden trodden upon.

[@arcadiaberger9204]

@@billbadson7598 The government thinks of itself as the father in our community family, and Daddy doesn't care about fairness. Daddy just wants peace and quiet. So all of you shut up and get back in your places.

[@Soken50]

I've read Kafka's "The trial" and seen the modern sci-fi short film based on it with an AI twist, I don't want human bureaucracy or AIs administering justice.

[@anthonym4996]

A line I caught gave me pause; "The AI detects she was lying through her biometrics." Polygraphs are inadmissible in courts because they do not determine truthfulness and are interpreted subjectively.

[@EmpReb]

That’s an execuse that the Ai judge doesn’t buy

[@kushluk777]

Nightmare fuel. As you point out, these are heuristics that are *assumed* as accurate - but they could be totally inaccurate. And you'd have no method of argument.

[@DeclanMBrennan]

Polygraphs are quite rightly inadmissible in many courts. However fMRI brain scans, although costly and unwieldy currently, already appear to have far higher accuracy. It's far too early to know if this technology can be fooled by advanced meditation techniques or something else.

[@anthonym4996]

@@DeclanMBrennan Correct. The issue at heart there is right to privacy/giving a State the means to do so on a whim and, if allowed, narrowing the scope to capture only things relevant to the questions asked. I would opnion that those questioned would need to opt in to such intrusive methods, if society even decides to allow them at all.

[@paulhall9713]

True but as long as people keep confessing after a cop says they fail one they aren't going away. It never fails to amaze me that the suspect who is lying never thinks that the cop might be lying too.

[@716monk]

Never been this early for court, nice

[@cosmictreason2242]

And you even got your PBJ

[@mopspear]

You're about to get DUNKED OOOOOON

[@johhanwindsalor9478]

A murderer was captured this morning and tried today. Sentence, death. Execution tonight at 6:00. All net. All channels. *WOULD YOU LIKE TO KNOW MORE?*

[@Clasticon73i]

Please remove me from your mailing list

[@mrcarlbaz1]

Yes

[@graydanerasmussen4071]

Starship Troopers. Perhaps Helldivers 2 :D

[@MiyamotoMusashi9]

Less murder will happen. Just like the wild west

[@ThirtytwoJ]

Meat for the Grinder.

[@johhanwindsalor9478]

Sweet... make sure to have the developers of Google's "GEMINI" A.I. to spearhead this initiative... *WHAT COULD GO WRONG?*

[@animistchannel]

This episode gave me flashbacks to the GR Andromeda episode "The Illusion of Majesty"... one of the best! Included lines like "My fate could be decided on faulty wiring!" and "This isn't programming; this is archaeology!" plus the ever-charming Tyr with his "Thank you so much for stopping by..."

[@ThirtytwoJ]

Great show. Not sure Isaac has seen it, he never mentions that one.

[@dariustiapula]

"I demand trial by combat!" Robot judge than created a robot black knight as their opponent.

[@MogofWar]

Player gets put into a Quake II death match.

[@donaldhobson8873]

@@MogofWar "If you die in the game, you die in real life". (Standard plot element to raise the stakes, however nonsensical it may be)

[@ArawnOfAnnwn]

@@MogofWar Should be Quake 3 imo.

[@ThirtytwoJ]

Uhhhh... I asked for Dark Age of Camelot... Not Shadow of the Colossus.. AI- get on with it or ill drop you in against Preston Garvey on lover loop... ..... Ok ok, fkin psychobot.

[@mylatahiri2572]

Oratrice Mecanique d'Analyse Cardinale

[@nos2342]

I was looking for this. 😂

[@ultimoguerreiro82]

I'm a veteran in the Judiciary System. I can't wait for it all to be automated. It's a sham, most of it is just a show. It's expensive, corrupt, slow, unfair and inefficient.

[@gb8628]

Who's going to invent/create/code these? I think that politicians and people in charge should be the front of the queue.

[@thekaxmax]

So, the Napoleonic Code? Investigative rather than confrontational, as he discussed.

[@heatsrink01]

Well, what parts are automated like is it at the ground level or are people arresting people and go infront of a robot judge?

[@a.p.2356]

Hell yeah, now it'll be expensive, corrupt, slow, unfair, inefficient, and literally inhuman.

[@thekaxmax]

@@a.p.2356 the whole point of the automation ia to remove the first 5 and minimise the last. Depends on what billionaires gets the contracts, mind you, but I'd go for a European judge over an American one.

[@billbadson7598]

43:22 _"Both were the spitting image and character of what people think of when they think of judges: very good men, and very burdened by their jobs."_ I wish I lived in a world where judges were thought of as "good men." It's a completely different social class I guess.

[@arthurdowney2846]

"Like a professor outlining the syllabus for a course that no one signed up for voluntarily-" perfectly describes how I act after about half way through that fifth of bourbon.

[@imagitu6409]

he who controls the algorithm, controls the future

[@thekaxmax]

Always been true, even pre- computers

[@donaldhobson8873]

And if no one controls the algorithm, the future goes out of control.

[@dying_allthetime]

​@@donaldhobson8873 that's why decentralization is the most important technological implementation of the future.

[@JankyBruv]

Who controls the algorithm, controls the future. Who controls the future now, controls the past. Who controls the present now, controls the algorithm. Who controls the past now, controls the the narratives of all the above.

[@vipondiu]

I love when Isaac drops the "...But this isn't an episode on X...". In this one we got a variant. Who else finds themselves using "...but this isn't a conversation/email/explanation on X..." more and more, unconsciously?

[@ivoryas1696]

vipondiu I find you simply tend to as you learn more... Otherwise you're mentally changing from textbook to textbook in every decently long informational conversation, so to speak. 😅

[@jl1618_]

Thank you for this video! Great content as always, and I think you're bringing thought and discussion to a very important topic that is already affecting society. I took a course on AI in law school and we read a case that implicates some of the issues discussed in your video: Loomis v. Wisconsin, wherein the defendant was sentenced using an algorithm and alleged discrimination by the algorithm, but wasn't permitted to review the algorithm as the court ruled it was proprietary to the third party that made it and there wasn't a constitutional rights implication in not being able to review the algorithm. The case was a window into how AI will become increasingly part of the legal system and how judges understand (or fail to understand) the role of AI in the law and its implications for our rights.

[@aragorn_]

As a lawyer (I work mostly with civil and family court) who has formerly worked in the judiciary system I can confidently say that today AI can judge at least half the cases (in my area and county). Specially be cause of (incidents of repetitive) precedents and supreme court rulings, at the end of the day lawyers just need to check if their clients checks most (if not all the) boxes. Otherwise, AI can help a lot in auditing and compliance saving a lot of time (e.g. compiling data and helping with interpretation). The biggest obstacle IMHO is that ppl don't like at all the idea of AI being a part of the judiciary/lawyer activities. I look forward for the innovations AI can bring to my career even with disapproval from society. Great video!

[@nurlindafsihotang49]

Yeah? Like when the current AI experiment in california court shows the 20% discount of punishment to white people than black or people of colour huh? And when the script checked, the AI script using LOMBROSSO BOOK! how quaint if you a white person too. 😂 Nope. Never. I will oppose it.

[@LostArchivist]

I would have to say, if the people do not want it in their governance, it ought not be as it is at the service of the people and if imposed against their will is a part of tyranny.

[@aragorn_]

@@LostArchivist I do agree with your statement. There's a thin line between using AI as tool to improve work and for it to be used "wrongly" or tyrannicaly, as you said. Even with proper implementation of AI tools on judiciary activities I still believe human supervision (at least) should be required. However I still believe that on criminal courts AI has no place regarding judging/sentencing, specially on jurisdictions with more tradition based laws (in general, not only crime court). But yeah, even tho I agree that the will of the people should be considered, the truth is that nowadays it's often ignored (for the good and for the bad).

[@donovansteltzner9080]

Isaac, you forgot the insurance companies. They will, no doubt, muddy a case and make an AI lose its mind.

[@isaacarthurSFIA]

I would suspect insurance companies to be growing users of AI

[@swausgebouwen143]

​@@isaacarthurSFIA I've been wondering for a while, how do you make the thumbnails for these videos?

[@isaacarthurSFIA]

@@swausgebouwen143 It really varies, I did a lot of our very early ones or sourced them from public domain art, but about two years in Jakub Grygier started making our thumbnails ever week, with me filling in on bonus episodes, and I counted myself very fortunate because he used to work on films including MCU hits and always refused to take any pay for them. At the end of 2022 though he wanted to make a big life change out of graphic art entirely - he got burned out - so I went back to making them or finding them from artists who donated their work to the show or public domain in general. I often skim through these sources and pick topics for episodes or the images polls based on an image, and then use it as the cover art for that episode. I'd imagine many are AI-created or assisted too though I never check and honestly don't care. I use AI myself sometime, this cover is one example, I wanted a robot-looking judge and AI delivered me an interesting one after a few tries :)

[@AdamsWorlds]

We have an automated justice system in the UK right now. Driving offences are a good one, you get produced a ticket in the post and sometimes they will say "you can do a course and not take points (points mean higher insurance)". You can choose to appeal the ticket but then you loose the right to the "course". Tickets can be produced automatically for speeding past a camera, jumping a light with a camera, or even these days someone reporting you with video (like a cyclist reporting you for "passing to close"). Even if you feel say with the cyclist footage they were in the wrong you dare not appeal it as your loose the right to the course and get the points. Even if you win an appeal it costs more so nobody chooses that option it would be really stupid to. We have the same with TV licencing also the BBC will just fine you for not paying and if you say you dont need a licence for the TV they will bombard you with letters and people coming around to knock at the door. If you dont answer the door and let them in, or if you tell the BBC you dont want them coming out to your house they will just issue a fine regardless saying your evading an investigation. lol. We have so many automated systems like this that seem to have a "way out", but that is just very inconvenient and often costs more than the automated punishment.

[@ComputerGarageLLC]

In your example case, I can see the advantages of AI in a simple dispute case. It would definately steamline the process. For more more complex cases, like class actions, not so much yet. Some of the duties you mentioned, yes. document validation, and eliminating rabbit holes, a judge assistance for quick retrieval of precedent, absolutely. But actual rulings on complex case. Not for a while. maybe a long while. But the day will come.

[@HOLDENPOPE]

Having the dramatic background music cut in right when you said it was missing, was genius

[@Kargoneth]

Bum-bum!

[@cannonfodder4376]

A most informative look at a very interesting topic. Have been looking forward to this one. Fantastic work as always, Isaac.

[@MrSimonw58]

Judge has a slot to insert dollar bills

[@griffenbaum]

No way 😂

[@JohnSagin-SimViDeLucis579]

MAKE IT RAIN WOOOOOH!

[@mattstorm360]

To render judgment, please insert two dollars!

[@tehbonehead]

So does yer mom!

[@JankyBruv]

Might as well already.

[@hithere5553]

Reminds me of the speech from the AI in the old Deus Ex game: “what is god, but the dream of good government?” It was, of course, making an argument in favor of it reshaping the world from the shadows.

[@captainferrite]

Uh, black box AI has been used to dispense judgement in the US for like a decade.

[@glenngoelzer3268]

While always fascinating, most of the time I tune in, I am so far out of my STEM depth I pretty much have to take or leave our host's assertions on faith. As a licensed attorney, I now imagine I feel how an actual physicist must feel listening to Isaac's reasonably accurate but necessarily rudimentary explanations. I would have liked to hear more about how AI might be used in the criminal context. It's potential to improve the morass which is civil or administrative litigation is almost unquestioned at this point. The hints about rehabilitation and retribution left me wanting more. Still, I was glad to hear the comment about the pursuit of justice being inherently a human endeavor. Very well said.

[@thebosun181]

The "CC" from John Varley's Steel Beach

[@spencernorman2626]

This is certainly a relevant topic, especially considering the rapid advancement we've been seeing. Let's hope we figure things out without too much chaos.

[@whirledpeaz5758]

Mercy to the guilty is cruelty to their victims.

[@JB-ym4up]

No thnaks

[@Kargoneth]

A large problem with humans is that their memories are malleable. The process of recollection itself can cause alterations.

[@thekaxmax]

Which is why questioning and cross-examination is such a skill

[@jamesfstokes]

Thanks for the excellent video! I think this is one of my favorite videos that I've watched of yours over the last couple years. I especially thought the example case was very interesting to listen to how it unfolded, especially when considering that that is a pretty realistic possibility when I think of an AI augmented legal system.

[@michalgajdos7575]

how do you punish AI FOR WRONG / MALICIOUS DECISION again?

[@joebutta7539]

Ai =artificial idiot GPT= garbage people technology Your rhetorical question falls on deaf ears, eyes and minds.

[@thekaxmax]

Why? Punish those who wrote the legal configuration settings. Until general ai is accepted as a person these are tools not people.

[@dying_allthetime]

Termination and replacement by improved system.

[@blackosprey2219]

When a manufacturer makes a crappy wheel that breaks, you punish the manufacturer.

[@isuckatusernames4297]

amazing epusode as always.

[@genejones7484]

Use multiple AI algorithms, say three, with human oversight,and use majority consensus. This would be more like our current jury system. Each could then access information independently to make better informed decisions .

[@ivoryas1696]

23:55 Honestly took me a little. 😂 I thought it was intentional censorship rather than a joke at first, although maybe it's just that I was focused on the chores I was doing. 😅

[@robertaylor9218]

Hell of an episode Isaac. I want to comment on the subject of jury editing data. I think it would be extremely important that jurors be able to watch unedited footage of the trial. I mean all of it; what the judge instructed to disregard, sensitive names, everything. Even if it means that they have to manually consent to be sequestered to view the data. My reasoning is that what is or is not relevant is supposed to largely be the juror’s realm. I imagine appeals judges can access stricken records by reviewing video or audio tapes if they feel it necessary. I believe juries must be given the same tools. This is also to stop corrupt, biased, or lazy court reporters, judges, and counsel from blocking data a reasonable juror could consider relevant; no matter how rare that might be.

[@Eldagusto]

Excellent I was waiting to see who helped with the law council for the script, I know you had to have help when it was a tree law case.

[@mithrillis]

I think an interesting related question would be: would the concept of "crime" even exist if we have the capability to "fix" personality flaws, mental illnesses, or even antisocial tendencies? If we have the ability to rehabilitate anyone, wouldn't it be injustice to still punish criminals rather than to "cure" them? Does that mean we will have no more crime, only deviancy? Is this at odds with our individuality?

[@APERTURE-zx5fr]

(I do not know English, so I use a translator) of course, this does not apply to the topic of the video, but I just wanted to share this little text written under the impression of a series of videos about civilizations at the end of time. (I hope the translator translates everything correctly...) You probably don't know, but beyond our world, there is another, more ancient world. It was beautiful, but for you all its splendor flew by so quickly that you would not have had time to understand what a riot of colors swept past you, because in the outer universe, during the time that we are talking, one or two generations of stars would have already been born and died. Oh, yes, forgive the old man, you don't even know what stars are. These are such beautiful big glowing balls scattered across the background. It's a pity that they all went out long ago. They were swallowed up by an ancient, cold, and boundless darkness. The darkness that will one day remove us. But don't worry, her children are taking care of us, they are just as dark, strong, and inescapable. They were once stars, but the darkness rewrote them into their likenesses, but they still remember who they were, and even if very, very faintly, they still glow, and this light gives us life. Why did the darkness curse them, to die in a bright flash, when there would be no one left who could see their bright ending. But there is also something good in this darkness. Although she made the whole material world quiet and boring, but thanks to this we can now talk. It seems to you that I am located next to you, but in fact there are dozens of light-years between us in the material world. But in a dead universe there is no hurry, so for us this distance is no more than a couple of unnoticeable moments. And although our world of numbers, relays and bits is also beautiful in its own way, in its almost eternal glory, I still miss those distant times, even for us, the times when my native world sowed in its brief splendor... I've already delayed you too much, go ahead and enjoy the eternity that lies at your feet.

[@Yezpahr]

6:52 Is this a thing we'll only understand in the future? The woman holds a coffeecup to her head as if it has a function. Meh, who am I kidding, I've seen stranger things than that pop up in stock footage haha. Can't wait for the Lawyer Reacts video from Legal Eagle on this futuristic lawsuit simulation for a few added layers on why this is a bad idea.

[@gravity_well5627]

she had a brain freeze so she was trying to warm up her forehead with coffee.

[@chillax319]

Imagine Google AI used as a judge......

[@cosmictreason2242]

White? Guilty

[@jimboscooter432]

@cosmictreason2242 It dosen't even know White people exist. It thinks black people were the nazis, how's that not racist 😂

[@isbestlizard]

Good idea. FIrst level civil court systems should be entirely automated, and free. If you think they got it wrong, you can pay a lawyer and appeal.

[@YuriKozloff]

Now there's already a JudgeAI project

[@johnsearz3928]

After years of being inspired by your content, I just became a member of the National Space Society. Thank you for all you and your team do!

[@adilsongoliveira]

That reminds me the first episode of Lexx 😁

[@Koplerio]

"Automated Justice" - Helldiver playerbase: "Now we're talking."

[@briancohen-doherty4392]

"Presumably not so stupid...." 😂😂😂

[@briancohen-doherty4392]

Next level..... Is it ethical for Aphabet to passively listen to you without explicit permission or notification?

[@Frequincy100]

I always love Isaac's Story Time

[@seanaugagnon6383]

I wish I could've watched these during class in 6 or 7th grade. I've always loved science and astronomy, but watching these would've made me realize I could be one of those people. Now I'm 38 and clean houses. My lifetime of accumulated knowledge about science and theories will fade away without ever seeing the light.

[@martinfitzsimons5884]

Excited by the topic title ^^

[@edwardmccall450]

Not in a good way. 😢

[@bobjonson143]

I love the optimism of this show

[@fine93]

automated witch hunts

[@thekaxmax]

If run by the present GOP yes

[@TheBoatPirate]

i remember reading a book a LONG time ago. this one scene in it has always stuck with me and makes me completely not trust ai. in this scene, the protagonist is walking down the street, not doing anything wrong. this cop car pulls up, opens the door. nobody inside. it says youre under arrest, get in. i will NEVER ACCEPT AI. in any way shape or form.

[@SmoochieRoo]

as long as it's not chatgpt derived and actually expertly coded/made, with a substrate that makes kt just barely shy of sapience, I'm fine with an AI judge.

[@DamageJackyl]

Screw "miners on the Moon"! I want a Whalers on the Moon episode!! They carry a harpoon, and they tell tall tales cause there ain't no whales, they're whalers on the Moon!

[@JankyBruv]

Why do I feel like this is a script for a Mighty Boosh episode?? 😂 😂 😂

[@berserkasaurusrex4233]

@@JankyBruv It's from Futurama's second episode.

[@JankyBruv]

@berserkasaurusrex4233 Oh yeah. No shit. That is totally legit. I was just saying that I find it has Mighty Boosh vibes. It would fit right in there like skintight swimwear. It totally follows the m.o. to the layout of the show. It's clear you're not familiar, and if that is the deal... I really do feel You shd fix that for real.

[@berserkasaurusrex4233]

@@JankyBruv I know the Mighty Boosh, watched it all the time in college. My gf watches The Great British Bake Off and can never understand why I keep yelling "Old Gregg" every time I see it.

[@Onyx-qd9tl]

“What the duck someone said…” still haven’t heard Isaac swear yet, but I’m going to say that counts😂

[@Kargoneth]

What the duck is wrong with his spellchecker?

[@simon2493]

I can easily see this flying in countries with civil law when it's judges who decide about guilt and severity of punishment, but they are doing it based on procedures. In common law it's harder to implement.

[@marianneb.7112]

Speed would be a good improvement.

[@carlousmagus5387]

And what's to keep people from programming their biases and ideology into these robots? Do you really want a machine or a program to decide whether or not you spend time in prison or jail, whether or not you pay a fine, and if so, how large? Would you want a computer to decide whether or not you are to be executed and how to execute you?

[@Zonkotron]

Careful. The death penalty is not befitting of a civilized country and prison doesnt work really either. We should assume that an advanced civilization would use resocialization and treatment founded on evidence based psychology and psychiatry

[@Joaking91]

There is no such thing as biasless and ideology-less justice anyway

[@cosmictreason2242]

@@Zonkotronyou're half right. Prison is unethical, execution is not. The point of justice is not to traumatize or reform criminals, is to protect society. If somebody's not a threat, give them a fine and send them away. If they refuse to pay for many years or reoffend unrepentantly, then it rises to a capital offense due to the spurning of law and order.

[@theOrionsarms]

The biases and ideology are allredy programed into the laws, so in two years from now in Alabama : a court can sentence to death a worker that accidentally dropped a test tube with a dozen of frozen human embrions on the floor , but the same court don't do the same with the people that caused a power failure that destroyed few thausen of the same human embrions to be destroyed at the same facility, because the law makers say that.

[@cosmictreason2242]

To op, i agree that justice by definition requires a human mind. Machines should at most sort offenses statistically to assist a human judge in being consistently fair.

[@MrKIMBO345]

Back to Future 2 is the example of this subject. In this movie, this justice system is efficient as fast as just few days.

[@cosmictreason2242]

If a person can't go to trial within 3 weeks, they should be released. The alleged crime is clearly not a priority. Or we can stop prosecuting all the minor offenses glutting the system and delaying trial dates for serious crimes

[@MrKIMBO345]

​@@cosmictreason2242, that is **** up.

[@BarbarosaAlexander]

This is a very interesting perspective on low-level legal AI systems. I'm going to need some time to mull it over. And, as always, another great video for my nerd work Sunday.

[@RandomYT05_01]

This isn't even futurism. This is right now. This is presently relevant.

[@malcolmt7883]

How much compensation would I have to pay for someone to steal my cat?

[@barryon8706]

You'd have to find a cat burglar.

[@edwardstone1654]

Beat me by 13 minutes 😂

[@ASpaceOstrich]

My biggest criticism of the justice system is that we pretend we are robots incapable of nuance or understanding intent rather than the letter of the law. If I had my way, a corporation dancing around the spirit of a regulation while still technically following the letter of the regulation would get slapped with the fine for violating it, plus extra for trying to weasel out of it. In cases of crime the current justice system is more concerned with punishing people than making the world better. And society only even really functions thanks to selective enforcement of laws and rules. Even with our current overly robotic approach to the law, we still allow it to be broken all the time because we understand that sometimes its socially acceptable. This has been changing over time, and its not had good results. Many people have fond memories of things they did in their youth which are just straight up illegal, just unenforced. And as we become more robotic with our enforcement and less lenient, these experiences are being denied to the next generation but not being replaced by anything. Language is our second language, and the language of the law is inherently flawed. AI will presumably not be able to understand things on that instinctual, languageless level that human beings can, and will likely find the dissonance present in our laws and values to be a major stumbling block. It will require us to either become a lot more strict about things that don't need to be strictly enforced, or find some way to accurately express something that we're really bad at putting into words.

[@dominickprive2271]

I'm curious what resources did you use to learn about this subject?, do you have any law and automation book suggestions, or resources?

[@GeoFry3]

I would love to see AI put to use in law. Congress: we are passing this bill to.... AI Supreme Court 2.3seconds after receiving the 10,000 page bill: Un-Constitutional, denied.

[@whatwhat9519]

this is something i'm pretty worried about just watch elysium

[@classarank7youtubeherokeyb63]

Hey Isaac, you don't have to insult me just because my knowledge of the legal system comes exclusively from Ugo Lord shorts.

[@dingo4530]

Finally, an episode with tree law

[@eaglepeakalpha]

What I like is how mundane and ordinary the hypothetical case was - it's something that could happen to anyone (or at least, anyone owning property with a sufficient amount of greenery)

[@petrz5474]

A version of this happened to me

[@VideoconferencingUSA]

Nice job

[@bobo-cc1xw]

Surely its the offspring of microsoft clippy. Not just calculators and spam filters

[@isajoha9962]

Kind of already happening on a "sublime level". Eg being validated as unimportant and insignificant judgement, that many faces on social media. Don't matching looks, attraction, wealth, wisdom, education, heresy, background, status, right opinions, right age etc accepted by algorithms.

[@petrz5474]

I have noticed that at least in 1 EU country, having a university results in sentence. I am talking about jail time not a fine

[@murderedcarrot9684]

My idea is to use AI to inform law enforcement what crimes are being committed and whose wanted and pay based on the individual cops behavior.

[@DefaultUser61]

I saw a short film about this one time and a guy got convicted for something he couldn’t do. He didn’t have any real people to argue against and that’s scary. But then I thought how many people get convicted for things they didn’t do now?

[@mrnnhnz]

I find this area of discussion very interesting. Most of this particular episode was about what the type of AI that we currently have, "weak AI," (though it may be strong from a brute-force point of view, it is in no way shape or form self-aware. It cannot make value judgements, except using data it's been fed (as opposed to considering the true merits of the values in question.) It is not aware in any way of anything, including how people feel about their situation. How would our current weak AI be able to guide a restorative justice session or a session involving victim impact statements? It can be programmed with guidelines, but my belief is that these kinds of things could not successfully be done by the weak AI that is all we currently have access to. If, however, we create strong AI, (which you called "AGI" in this episode. I started writing this comment before you introduced that near the end...) which has varying levels of self-awareness and the ability to make value judgements and so forth, then roles like the judge can be taken over by AI, and this could be a good thing, as they could be more impartial than any human. That said, as humans would be the ones on the receiving end of any justice they mete out, it would, even then, behoove us, I believe, to have a human being included in part of the decision-making process. (I'm writing this from the perspective of a Kiwi. I'm not hugely familiar with the US system.) Incidentally, with strong AI, you don't have to worry (so much,) about biases in the training data, because the AI uses it's sentience and discretion to judge the value and worth of the training data it's training on. Strong AI will also be able to genuinely consider (instead of doing so in a simulated way, which will be all weak AI can ever do, no matter how much brute force it's able to apply,) those things you mentioned: understanding, empathy, mercy, the ability to interpret the spirit of the law... All this said, I reckon there is a place for weak AI in the justice system right now. It just needs to be used with caution, and only on tasks where humans can at least spot check their work. Your statement, "We need robust safeguards and ethical guidelines, and a will to monitor compliance," makes me think of the saying, "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." Very good and thought-provoking episode thanks 👍

[@petrz5474]

Too long. If your purpose is to get something across to get a discussion going then you should consider leaving a way to contact you

[@goatkiller666]

Im typing this BEFORE I watch the video, just to see if my thoughts are correct. AI at the moment is limited to repetitive, niche tasks. Scanning through facial req, bad newspaper articles, etc. they’re VERY specialized. I honestly don’t see the value of a generalist AI can can emulate a human… you end up with Marvin the robot from the Hitchhiker’s Guide. “Brain the size of a planet, he has me open the door for him.” Laws are humans trying to take abstract ideas and make them fit into words. There will always be loopholes, and there will always be unintended consequences, and it takes a human mind to navigate that. An amazingly well-trained human, at that. Not to mention that laws are written by humans who might have biases inherent in their thinking. Voter suppression laws, red-lining, even slavery. All of that is (or was) fully legal, though usually not just. I mean… even once American ratified the amendment that abolished the condition of slavery… they never actually made enslaving someone a crime. (Yes, that really happened, guy walked on a technicality.) It’s this kind of trying to fit a moral abstract into words that constantly needs humans looking at the edge conditions, and determining how they land. Until we have human-level AIs, they won’t be able to take over the duty. I mean… sure, they could probably handle parking tickets. But for less effort, you could set up every car with auto-pay functionality, and accomplish the same end. In Washington state, they have those EZ-Pass things you put in your window. When you go through a toll booth, it scans you, you don’t slow down, it’s all good. Then we turned a bunch of HOV lanes into “Pay the toll OR have passengers” lanes. But if the cameras encounter an EZ-Pass, it bills your account, regardless of whether your an HOV. When there was a direct referendum on legalizing recreational weed. It passed. It passed hard. The actual lawmakers were kind of stuck. Being mostly old white dudes who thought Reefer Madness was a documentary, they started putting up barrier laws. One guy had a weed bar ready to go, like a booze bar, but geared towards weed. Days before it opened, but well after he’d finished rebuilding the interior, they made it illegal to smoke weed in public. In the same country that embraced buying in bulk for cheaper per-unit prices, buying more that arbitrary amounts of drugs is “intent to distribute”. Sodomy was illegal in many states (here defined as sex for any reason that isn’t procreative). Eventually a case trickled up to the Supreme Court in 2003 overruling those laws. And frankly there was a start-up company that tried to use ChatGPT (or a competitor) to prepare legal briefs. The ABA shut them down hard. So, at the very least, we would need to vastly redefine our laws so an AI can encounter fewer hiccups.

[@Poetryman6969]

The notion of a robot typing or speaking to computer is the joke that never stops being funny. Wifi or a temporary physical interface would be more efficient. I am almost certain that an even faster and better way for machines to talk to one another will be found. Sharks with laser beams. Or just the laser beams. Hold the sharks.

[@RipOffProductionsLLC]

On the other hand, a regulation saying an AI can't interface directly with other technology like that, in order to keep them more "equal" with organic life, could be implemented.

[@Poetryman6969]

@@RipOffProductionsLLCPoint taken. There will doubtless be some entity somewhere that seeks to "even the playing field" in some way that placates humans but actually has no real effect.

[@EpicSOB_]

A thought I had just now, near the end of the video, any judicial AI should probably be imbued with a set of personalities and avatars to reduce the likelihood of an appeal. Having an avatar that is some ware between Santa and Judge Judy, would probably be ideal.

[@EricPham-gr8pg]

Referee role is best for automate in procedure or detect questionable miss point or overlooked details or verified GPS and ip game if nonclassified person involved may be best so no vilolence needed

[@talideon]

34:06 - ah, now... that's a bit tasteless. 😞

[@ThirtytwoJ]

The legal AI are gonna need mental health counselors...

[@swampcastle8142]

I'll never be allowed. Too difficult for the powerful to bribe their way out of trouble.

[@peteroland5389]

Just FYI, bullet stratification has been seriously discredited. Any two Ruger pistols, for instance, that are undamaged, and from the same assembly line will have more or less identical markings when firing the same ammunition.

[@TheGreatUnwashedThing]

Given certain recent events on a certain north-west European island I feel like an automated judicial system based on current 'AI' (and probably more to the point, current attitudes towards it) is the stuff of nightmares.

[@lenwhatever4187]

Quite a well balanced presentation. As there seem to have been a number of time in the past few years where government has used "the process" as the punishment, that is punishing someone in an illegal way knowing it would be possible to appeal and win. I have to wonder if this would make it better or worse. There have been a number of cases of misuse of law in the past few years with a lot of cases of decisions being over turned but the person punished having lost time at work, or having had to pay an expensive lawyer. It would be interesting if an AI judge would make that better or worse. I can see it happening though, if for no other reason than to prevent government over reach..... but it could go the other way too. A law created illegally and used harshly with an acquittal coming posthumously. The idea that things are improving in general, while true for a number of things, may not be doing so well with our leaders.

[@petrz5474]

If a judge on the way to work gets into a minor car accident, and even if that judge is not at fault, the inconvenience of having the vehicle repaired influences the judgement for the day. And so das learning that a close relative or friend died. AI will not suffer from this

[@Kargoneth]

Inefficiencies. Delays. Shortcuts. Biases. Equivocation. Ambiguities.

[@bigjay875]

Justice is dead in America!

[@davidbrennan660]

For the IA Algorithm there is only the LAW. ….and a fascinating episode to boot.. thanks IA.

[@AnimeShinigami13]

Legal eagle did an amusing video about that new york case. I laughed so hard about it. Joan reminds me of a landlady I once had. V.V;;;;

[@dragonturtle2703]

The Nebula episodes come out on the channel after a year IIRC, right? Btw, love the channel.

[@anvos658]

Honestly I find a similar answer to AI, of let it do the bulk simple work and remove some of the skill gap in access to information, but keep a human in the process.

[@steambub]

I haven't watch the video yet, but I wouldn't mind an AI prosecutor, AI assisted lawyers and judge, and human jury.

[@calvingreene90]

The people to ask about the condition of the tree is the people that removed it.

[@jdhenge]

As long as judges remain immune from liability for their decisions, we may as well have AI judges. The only thing that can keep judges honest is accountability, and that means liability and that means having something to lose. So basically, even human judges are AI unless they have liability

[@bmedlin00]

It would be the only way to get the law applied equally to all levels of crime without bias