4 ms·

Instead of asking to stop its use, why not ask that it be "supervised" up to the point where its results beat the average judge in a given area of law?

holtalanm 9y ago
I was thinking the same thing. Why should it stop when it has the potential to be much more efficient? Just give it sufficient oversight, and I'm fine with this.
tangent128 9y ago
What metric do you use to say it "beats" a human judge?
- Danihan 9y ago
  If the judge loses in hand-to-hand combat.
- pizzetta 9y ago
  When it shows less bias than a human judge. Can also be tied to the failure rate of appeals.
- clavalle 9y ago
  If the offenders have better outcomes. Time spent in jail. Re-arrest rate after release. Job performance after release, etc.
- jpalomaki 9y ago
  If thinking about setting bail, isn't the target there to keep the bail amounts (or cases where bail is denied) as low as possible while making sure that most people appear in court? Here a simple metrics would be the average bail and the percentage of people who appeared on court. On a job like this, I can't really see how a human could beat a machine. And you don't need any kind of "artificial intelligence". This is just standard statistics stuff that every insurance company and bank does.
- swsieber 9y ago
  How about when it gives results that a human judge would give right after having eaten... except consistently, and not only after meals. See http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2011/04/11/justice-is-served-but-more-so-after-lunch-how-food-breaks-sway-the-decisions-of-judges/ http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2011/04/1... for the example of the problem we need to solve.
openasocket 9y ago
What does supervision mean in this case? To actually gather data, you'd have to give this system power to actually sentence people. And sentencing people to jail based on the decisions of an explicitly work-in-progress AI purely for the purposes of experimentation is a serious ethical violation.

holtalanm 9y ago

I was thinking the same thing. Why should it stop when it has the potential to be much more efficient? Just give it sufficient oversight, and I'm fine with this.

tangent128 9y ago

What metric do you use to say it "beats" a human judge?

Danihan 9y ago
If the judge loses in hand-to-hand combat.
pizzetta 9y ago
When it shows less bias than a human judge. Can also be tied to the failure rate of appeals.
clavalle 9y ago
If the offenders have better outcomes. Time spent in jail. Re-arrest rate after release. Job performance after release, etc.
jpalomaki 9y ago
If thinking about setting bail, isn't the target there to keep the bail amounts (or cases where bail is denied) as low as possible while making sure that most people appear in court? Here a simple metrics would be the average bail and the percentage of people who appeared on court. On a job like this, I can't really see how a human could beat a machine. And you don't need any kind of "artificial intelligence". This is just standard statistics stuff that every insurance company and bank does.
swsieber 9y ago
How about when it gives results that a human judge would give right after having eaten... except consistently, and not only after meals. See http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2011/04/11/justice-is-served-but-more-so-after-lunch-how-food-breaks-sway-the-decisions-of-judges/ http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2011/04/1... for the example of the problem we need to solve.

openasocket 9y ago

What does supervision mean in this case? To actually gather data, you'd have to give this system power to actually sentence people. And sentencing people to jail based on the decisions of an explicitly work-in-progress AI purely for the purposes of experimentation is a serious ethical violation.