5 ms·

> The judge indicated during the trial that he wasn’t buying Shapiro’s projection. After his testimony, Leon said he was "confused." Further explanation from Sh

> The judge indicated during the trial that he wasn’t buying Shapiro’s projection. After his testimony, Leon said he was "confused." Further explanation from Shapiro didn’t help. "I’m not sure I got it, but it’s too late and too hot to belabor the point any further," the judge said. Amazing on so many different levels. (Shapiro is the economist whose model the DOJ based their case off of).

_rpd 8y ago
Absolutely shameful. AI judges can't come soon enough.
- SrslyJosh 8y ago
  Where do you think the training data for AI judges would come from?
  - vokep 8y ago
    evaluations of historical judgements made and what the consequences were. How to define good/bad consequences becomes the problem then, but thats the nature of it.
    - sigfubar 8y ago
      Such evaluations are useless as a training set because they inherit the biases of whoever wrote the evaluations. Of course, if fairness isn’t a desired property, feel free to carry on.
    - 103e 8y ago
      It's AI judges, all the way down.
- coderdude 8y ago
  This is the HN quote of the century
- peterwwillis 8y ago
  I, for one, welcome our new AI overlords.
- ReverseCold 8y ago
  And who gets to decide what training data/processes the judges use?
  - seanp2k2 8y ago
    AI Training Specialists who are appointed by the party in power, of course! So different!
jaredklewis 8y ago
Well let's not grab our pitchforks just yet. I'm sure if this was a thread discussing Judge Leon's 2013 opinion that NSA metadata collection violated the 4th amendment, HN would be singing his praises. But in this case he's approved a merger we don't like so he must be a total idiot or (as is being suggested further down in the thread) was bribed and has family members that will be getting board AT&T seats pretty soon. Such is HN's fickle heart. Unsurprisingly, the case involved more nuance than could be contained in a Bloomberg article, so if you really want to understand the arguments involved, you'll have to slog through the 200 page opinion: http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/sites/dcd/files/17-2511opinion.pdf http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/sites/dcd/files/17-2511opinion.p... I'm generally depressed by the state of broadband competition in the US, but that doesn't automatically mean that Shapiro's "increased leverage harm" theory that vertical content-programmer-distributor integration will raise prices is correct. And even if it is intuitively correct or turns out to be right, it doesn't mean that we currently have sufficient supporting data for it to be a convincing argument to the courts.
- s2g 8y ago
  We can still pull out the pitchforks based on the notion that he didn't understand the "expert" opinion presented and just decided not bother?
  - blind_boy_grunt 8y ago
    Oral argument is usually just for clarifications/questions over the written briefs. Judge Leon likely later read the written briefs on his own time (that is his job, after all).
  - jaredklewis 8y ago
    I didn't find the exchange particularly extraordinary. The judge is expressing his opinion that he doesn't buy what Shapiro is selling. The judge will have already studied Shapiro's written arguments before the trial. During the oral arguments, the judge has a chance to clarify things from the written arguments. I haven't read the full transcript, but I imagine Leon didn't feel fully convinced by the written arguments, asked Shapiro to address some of his concerns, continued to feel unsatisfied and decided to move on. That's how it goes sometimes. Time is not unlimited and there are always too many things to cover. At the very least, Shapiro's argument is complicated and novel (it has never been used as a part of an anti-trust case before). Tellingly, the Bloomberg article doesn't not even attempt to explain or summarize the economic theory. It's not like Leon is pigheadedly refusing to accept some widely accepted, basic economic principle. If we are going to criticize the ruling, let's do so by discussing the substance of the judge's opinion, not courtroom banter.
AlexCoventry 8y ago
How is it that the executive branch is acting in a more principled and competent manner than the judicial, in this case? I suppose it could be good for the economy and general welfare of the nation that the price of good TV will go up, if it means people will be watching less of it.
- monochromatic 8y ago
  Which parts of the 200-page opinion did you find unprincipled or incompetent?
  - AlexCoventry 8y ago
    Decisions aren't assessed by page count. The comment I was responding to shows that the decision was based on an incomplete understanding of the complaint.

_rpd 8y ago

Absolutely shameful. AI judges can't come soon enough.

SrslyJosh 8y ago
Where do you think the training data for AI judges would come from?
- vokep 8y ago
  evaluations of historical judgements made and what the consequences were. How to define good/bad consequences becomes the problem then, but thats the nature of it.
  - sigfubar 8y ago
    Such evaluations are useless as a training set because they inherit the biases of whoever wrote the evaluations. Of course, if fairness isn’t a desired property, feel free to carry on.
  - 103e 8y ago
    It's AI judges, all the way down.
coderdude 8y ago
This is the HN quote of the century
peterwwillis 8y ago
I, for one, welcome our new AI overlords.
ReverseCold 8y ago
And who gets to decide what training data/processes the judges use?
- seanp2k2 8y ago
  AI Training Specialists who are appointed by the party in power, of course! So different!

jaredklewis 8y ago

Well let's not grab our pitchforks just yet. I'm sure if this was a thread discussing Judge Leon's 2013 opinion that NSA metadata collection violated the 4th amendment, HN would be singing his praises. But in this case he's approved a merger we don't like so he must be a total idiot or (as is being suggested further down in the thread) was bribed and has family members that will be getting board AT&T seats pretty soon. Such is HN's fickle heart. Unsurprisingly, the case involved more nuance than could be contained in a Bloomberg article, so if you really want to understand the arguments involved, you'll have to slog through the 200 page opinion: http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/sites/dcd/files/17-2511opinion.pdf http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/sites/dcd/files/17-2511opinion.p... I'm generally depressed by the state of broadband competition in the US, but that doesn't automatically mean that Shapiro's "increased leverage harm" theory that vertical content-programmer-distributor integration will raise prices is correct. And even if it is intuitively correct or turns out to be right, it doesn't mean that we currently have sufficient supporting data for it to be a convincing argument to the courts.

s2g 8y ago
We can still pull out the pitchforks based on the notion that he didn't understand the "expert" opinion presented and just decided not bother?
- blind_boy_grunt 8y ago
  Oral argument is usually just for clarifications/questions over the written briefs. Judge Leon likely later read the written briefs on his own time (that is his job, after all).
- jaredklewis 8y ago
  I didn't find the exchange particularly extraordinary. The judge is expressing his opinion that he doesn't buy what Shapiro is selling. The judge will have already studied Shapiro's written arguments before the trial. During the oral arguments, the judge has a chance to clarify things from the written arguments. I haven't read the full transcript, but I imagine Leon didn't feel fully convinced by the written arguments, asked Shapiro to address some of his concerns, continued to feel unsatisfied and decided to move on. That's how it goes sometimes. Time is not unlimited and there are always too many things to cover. At the very least, Shapiro's argument is complicated and novel (it has never been used as a part of an anti-trust case before). Tellingly, the Bloomberg article doesn't not even attempt to explain or summarize the economic theory. It's not like Leon is pigheadedly refusing to accept some widely accepted, basic economic principle. If we are going to criticize the ruling, let's do so by discussing the substance of the judge's opinion, not courtroom banter.

AlexCoventry 8y ago

How is it that the executive branch is acting in a more principled and competent manner than the judicial, in this case? I suppose it could be good for the economy and general welfare of the nation that the price of good TV will go up, if it means people will be watching less of it.

monochromatic 8y ago
Which parts of the 200-page opinion did you find unprincipled or incompetent?
- AlexCoventry 8y ago
  Decisions aren't assessed by page count. The comment I was responding to shows that the decision was based on an incomplete understanding of the complaint.