Would you support a court system ran by Artificial Intelligence

[F1980]

All judges have their own biases. Liberals and conservatives want to pack courts with people that will lean towards what their ideal societies are. "Conservative" judges and "Liberal" judges. What's the point of lady justice being blind if judges are not impartial?

So, why not have a court system that is run by AI and is maybe open sourced so there's no tinkering with shit? Completely 100% unbiased.

 

[cincymma79]

Possible
But it would be very conservative if it only went by the letter of the law
Might lead to butthurt

 

[Deleted member 159002]

No

 

[TheComebackKid]

Hell no. What is wrong with you people?

 

[Rhood]

No
You can't reason with a bot.

 

[AlexDB9]

.....

 

[KeepItRealist]

Nope. There are mitigating circumstances to lots of crimes and there's a good reason that sentences can be set from like 2 yrs to 15 and so on. Not always a good thing, but certainly in some cases it is. A judge can be lenient on someone who was clearly guilty of committing a crime, but there is a lot more to the story and such a system would not acknowledge that.

This is like the first version of The Punisher who would kneecap people for jaywalking.

 

[Dirt Road Soldier]

It would go great, until most people go free. Reasonable doubt is a hell of a thing.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

It would go great, until most people go free. Reasonable doubt is a hell of a thing.

Well, that's all in the programming. Reasonable doubt doesn't have to mean 'any possible doubt'.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Interesting idea. The tech isn't there yet, but if it were, it might be good.

 

[F1980]

Human judges will make far more mistakes than AI.

There's a robot surgical machine that makes far less mistakes than surgeons right this very moment.

People cannot seem to grasp that AI in future will be better than humans in every imaginable way. And as times progress, they will be 100x better, 1000x better, 10000000000000000x better, and so forth

 

[Fawlty]

The processing power required would be vast, like the way Douglas Adams would describe "vast" if you gave him a few shots of bourbon.

Far too many instances to account for when a machine would not understand exonerating evidence overcoming prior probabilities for subtle but human reasons. It wouldn't know how to contextualize stuff. Too many permutations that the machine would have to work through which are easily discarded by the human mind.

Your better bet would be a human brain that is enhanced by AI.

 

[Gregolian]

There's like... 6-7 movies, 2 good and the rest bad... about why this is a bad idea.

 

[Headkicktoleg]

No thank you

 

[F1980]

The processing power required would be vast, like the way Douglas Adams would describe "vast" if you gave him a few shots of bourbon.

Far too many instances to account for when a machine would not understand exonerating evidence overcoming prior probabilities for subtle but human reasons. It wouldn't know how to contextualize stuff. Too many permutations that the machine would have to work through which are easily discarded by the human mind.

Your better bet would be a human brain that is enhanced by AI.

An AI does not think like a computer of the present. It will not just be a machine, it will be something vastly more intelligent than us and be able to comprehend anything that humans could and be able to understand things that humans are not able to with our limited intelligence.

The bottom line is more innocent people will be free instead of being locked up in prison.

 

[Fawlty]

An AI does not think like a computer of the present. It will not just be a machine, it will be something more intelligent and be able to comprehend anything that humans could and be able to understand things that humans are not able to with their limited intelligence.

I don't see how that would solve the problem of incalculably complex social problems and their prescriptions, which human minds are very well evolved for.

 

[F1980]

I'm getting ahead of myself. When I made this thread, I was thinking more of the Supreme Court. The SC decides if something is constitutional or not.

But the issue now is that these judges are picked based PURELY on their political leanings. Each judge has their own interpretation of the Bill of Rights. For example, an anti-gun judges is more likely to to vote for more gun control. A religious judge will more likely vote to constraint abortion practices.

 

[F1980]

I don't see how that would solve the problem of incalculably complex social problems and their prescriptions, which human minds are very well evolved for.

They will solve these complex social issues because they are exponentially more intelligent than humans. Any expert on AI will tell you this. Not only that, but they will solve every problem known to man. The AI you are imagining is that of a robot form the 1960s.

 

[aunshi189]

Fuck it just ask Alexa. She probably has enough dirt and personal info on everyone to be pretty accurate.

 

[Fawlty]

They will solve these complex social issues because they are exponentially more intelligent than humans. Any expert on AI will tell you this. Not only that, but they will solve every problem known to man. The AI you are imagining is that of a robot form the 1960s.

Oh okay