The world’s first AI legal assistant | Andrew Arruda | TED Institute

[@KemptonLam]

Fascinating talk! KZbin CC is aweful with names so here are two corrections for those who care. 4:04 Jimoh Ovbiagele is the friend Andrew talks about here and co-founder of ROSS. 4:42 Pargles Dall`Oglio is another co-founder of ROSS.

[@diogohemmer5268]

Andrew, we started the same jorney at Brazil. Our focus is the development of new tools to empower small companyes and give them acess of good legal practices.

[@진유빈-i4g]

In this lecture, we talked about establishing a system that allows lawyers to collaborate with machines, as well as positive opinions in favor of the introduction of legal AI lawyers. It was impressive that AI would improve the quality of defense by allowing lawyers to quickly find necessary cases by asking questions in natural language and reducing the time and time spent by lawyers in litigation. It was also impressive to see the development of Ross to solve the social problem of 80 percent of a million people standing in court alone without a lawyer, in the wake of the case of his friend Jim.

[@hacking.society7837]

It is not only the high costs for lawyers than ban people from accessing justice but simply the fact that many people do not know how to approach it or have prejudices against lawyers and therefore do not employ one. I like the idea of ROSS very much, but maybe there simpler solutions to begin with. In our podcast we featured a tech-entrepreneur, who came up with the idea of a consumer protection chatbot. Not an AI-lawyer, but a simple tool that guides and advices you on your first steps on how to approach consumer claim.

[@community1854]

As a lawyer, my hats off to Arruda!!

[@pankajjoshi8292]

I am interested in AI. can anyone suggest me links and study materials on making a simple AI lawyer. Thanku

[@aresmars2003]

In the olden days (1990s), it would be called an expert system.

[@ottorocket03]

"more money should'nt equal better justice"

[@markarmage3776]

Ross is an assisting tool, however, it can not replace human clerk. Simple reason, it still can not understand the law. The clerk doesn't just look up legal materials, but they have to select the suitable material. And the only way they can do that is not by looking up key words, but they have to understand the underlining meaning of the material. And if Ross capable of doing that, it shall not replace just clerk, but it shall replace human beings as well, because to understand underlying meaning of law is to understand human emotions and human thinking, terrifying.

[@НигарАллахвердиева]

The video content is so excellent, congratulations

[@masselectro9068]

Ai will help lawyers but never replace a lawyer

[@businesslp3027]

If legal aid lawyers are overworked, why not build a solution for legal aid attorneys or for people to do their own research??

[@C3yl0]

I don’t know which law he is talking about because in personal injury you don’t pay. The problem is that people keep thinking they know everything and can go over the system.

[@trinhthuydung9888]

the sound is not good I am quite disappointed

[@businesslp3027]

Why they ain’t just teach him how to do legal research ?? 7:35

[@mauriciodavila2357]

whats the advantage if ure spicilized and have a normal search engine

[@nforbes]

Most lawyer's would just pocket that extra $9,000.00 that the vulnerable client would, most likely, still wind up having to pay. But I hope I'm wrong.

[@GeeTrieste]

4:23 Why a single mom? Why not a single dad? Or shared custody between mom & dad?? The answer is obvious to anyone who knows the domestic courts bias against dads.

[@rishavbhowmik7778]

There should be no Lawers at all. Justice should be made as easy as getting a Learning Driving License.

[@joyeechengify]

humanity ain't all sunshine and rainbows my dear

[@munnypoltric]

save us AI. Please save us dear AI lord

[@ValerianTexeira]

I am very much impressed by this video. I belong to a downtrodden community of more than 500 people. Who have been suffering under the tyrannical land lordship of a most influential l entity able to buy the justice system with its economic, political and religious powers. Do you take cases from India?

[@palakbhardwaj4050]

summary : many problems prexisiting , one solution exists

[@killereverb3928]

Andrew believed he would make a shit ton more money with AI than slogging it as an attorney. LOL Oh, but he sleeps better hugging the platitude he's trying to help those who have no access to the expensive legal system. You be the judge........

[@thezyreick4289]

Spoken like an overpriced lawyer angry that he's being slowly replaced

[@killereverb3928]

@@thezyreick4289 Not at all. Lawyering is a hell of a lot more than researching case law and statutes. ROSS won’t replace me. I’ve done a ton of research and it takes time and experience. I made it a strong point over years being able to find the case that’s on all fours and is persuasive to both the court and opposing counsel. However, the majority of cases use the same cases over and over. You’re not constantly searching for the “Golden bullet” case that appears from the shadows to give you the win on a single issue let alone one that settles the entire shooting match. No, young squire - I make the most money with my brain balls and a phone or correspondence. ROSS isn’t going to do that for me. Huge paydays for me and my colleagues typically flow from matters that make a negligence case. Duty Breach Causation and Damages. I don’t need ROSS in the biggest majority of those lucrative SETTLEMENTS. I need good facts and a catastrophic injury and a fat insurance policy or assets. In all actuality ROSS could assist me more than threaten my livelihood. Nah, I’m good with or without ROSS. My comments were directed to the shill who thinks he’s going to revolutionize litigation through a computer that helps in doing research. What a noble or is it novel idea. The major legal search engines products and services all try to provide better ideas all the time. My point is neither this guy or ROSS are coming to save the poor old laymen litigant. No, ROSS will assist the people who either can pay for it - which is nobody unless they go to this guy’s firm, or it will be purchased or licensed by an expensive firm (the kind you hate) lol Remind me, what was your point? Oh right, that I’m quaking in my boots because ROSS is going to replace me! Right. Well if you say so - it’s bound to be true! Lol If ever I become fearful of ROSS I’ll let you know. Have a great day guy.

[@rabarbaraism]

DOES HE MEAN MIKE ROSS??????!1111

[@konthai9990]

Haha maybe.

[@jenndaizy]

I KNOW RIGHTT

[@viktoriabrown4310]

Is Ross a robot or a web site now? I want to get it

[@akn501]

Did IBM answered? IBM is getting better in hypothetical thinking.

[@9assahrasoum3asahboou87]

fathi medis fes said thank you so much

[@businesslp3027]

So Ross is for lawyers. Why not just make it for the people and make it so they understand it??

[@markarmage3776]

Because that would require the system capable of understanding law and legal reasoning, and that is way, way, way beyond their capabilities. It's a tool, not a person, not a lawyer. Go to their website, you'll see the disadvantages. It's just a big Google search focusing on legal materials, it's not capable of thinking as another lawyer. The lawyer after using Ross to get the materials he want, will have to do lawyer work of using those materials to make his case. And that takes years. Laws and cases are expression of ethics, emotions, reasons all combined into one. Deep learning law is like deep learning human beings, the technology haven't gotten to that level yet, a few decades too soon for it. Once you can create a machine that understand laws and make reasoning, you have created an artificial human beings capable of human philosophical reasoning, and that is terrifying. For now, it's just a big encyclopedia. You need to know what you want to search for, otherwise you'll get lost.

[@sownheard]

2

[@RynaxAlien]

lawyers are corrupt and greedy

[@IgorGabrielan]

I sell domain names laws.ai lex.ai court.ai ai = Artificial Inte;;igence