3 ms·

That's no different from how regular law enforcement works. It's the standard to which any autonomous law enforcement should be implemented. If you want to b

That's no different from how regular law enforcement works. It's the standard to which any autonomous law enforcement should be implemented. If you want to build better prosecutors that understand statistics, that should be considered a separate project. One AI that assembles the best case against the accused, and another AI that critically examines that case and discards it if it fails to meet some threshold for statistical relevance, or passes it on to human prosecutors if it does.

AnthonyMouse 8y ago
There are at least two differences. One is that the selection process is still opaque. If you have a corrupt prosecutor you're screwed either way. But if you have an honest prosecutor and you give them a collection of evidence selected for a bias in favor of guilt, they have no independent way of knowing that. So now you not only need an honest prosecutor, you need an honest AI, and we're back to the opaqueness issues. The second problem is that in principle right now if the prosecutor and the defense attorney spend an equal amount of resources, they each get proportional results. If you create this database which the prosecutor can use, can the defense also use it? Do they get access to the data to run their own queries and algorithms against? If so it seems a rather large privacy problem, since the database would contain sensitive information about everyone, but if not then you're handing an asymmetric advantage to the prosecution.
- Nasrudith 8y ago
  I believe the data being compiled in the first place is the privacy problem - especially when it is in the hands of government officials with the power to jail, seize, and execute. Transparent at least allows everyone to go through it and undermine it and the system throughly. "The judge has more corruption data points than the accused sentenced, and this newborn with a Han name has a far higher rating than this infamous connected embezzler!"

AnthonyMouse 8y ago

There are at least two differences. One is that the selection process is still opaque. If you have a corrupt prosecutor you're screwed either way. But if you have an honest prosecutor and you give them a collection of evidence selected for a bias in favor of guilt, they have no independent way of knowing that. So now you not only need an honest prosecutor, you need an honest AI, and we're back to the opaqueness issues. The second problem is that in principle right now if the prosecutor and the defense attorney spend an equal amount of resources, they each get proportional results. If you create this database which the prosecutor can use, can the defense also use it? Do they get access to the data to run their own queries and algorithms against? If so it seems a rather large privacy problem, since the database would contain sensitive information about everyone, but if not then you're handing an asymmetric advantage to the prosecution.

Nasrudith 8y ago
I believe the data being compiled in the first place is the privacy problem - especially when it is in the hands of government officials with the power to jail, seize, and execute. Transparent at least allows everyone to go through it and undermine it and the system throughly. "The judge has more corruption data points than the accused sentenced, and this newborn with a Han name has a far higher rating than this infamous connected embezzler!"