3 ms·

Gee good thing everyone in court gets good representation at reasonable prices eh? I get that lawyers think their profession is important (it is) and that by a

Gee good thing everyone in court gets good representation at reasonable prices eh? I get that lawyers think their profession is important (it is) and that by and large they’re positive for their clients (they are), but there are a lot of people who simply do not have access to any worthwhile representation. I saw Spanish-speaking kids sent to juvenile detention for very minor charges conducted in English with no interpreter and a completely useless public defender. So in my view that is the alternative for many people, not Pretty Decent Representation. There are people who can stomach the downside risks to push this tech forward for people who cannot stomach the downside risks of the current reality.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> lot of people who simply do not have access to any worthwhile representation They’d be better off representing themselves than trusting a non-lawyer “lawyer” that subpoenas no-show cops. Not another Andreessen-backed cluster.
- ethanbond 4y ago
  Do you know that? How do you know that’s what the model would do? How do you know that the defendant doesn’t have an 80 IQ and an elementary school grasp on English? Do you think this doesn’t happen today and that these people don’t get absolutely dragged by the system?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - notahacker 4y ago
    We know that subpoenaing [possibly] no-show cops is what the model will do because that is what the CEO says the model did in the run up to this particular case. Someone with an 80 IQ and an elementary school grasp of English is going to get absolutely dragged by the system with or without a "robot lawyer" if they insist on fighting without competent representation, but they'd probably still stand a better chance of getting off a fine on a technicality if they weren't paying a VC-backed startup to write a letter make sure the cops turned up to testify against them. They'd also be more likely to not get absolutely dragged if they listened to a human that told them not to bother than a signup flow that encouraged them to purchase further legal representation to pursue the case.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

> lot of people who simply do not have access to any worthwhile representation They’d be better off representing themselves than trusting a non-lawyer “lawyer” that subpoenas no-show cops. Not another Andreessen-backed cluster.

ethanbond 4y ago
Do you know that? How do you know that’s what the model would do? How do you know that the defendant doesn’t have an 80 IQ and an elementary school grasp on English? Do you think this doesn’t happen today and that these people don’t get absolutely dragged by the system?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- notahacker 4y ago
  We know that subpoenaing [possibly] no-show cops is what the model will do because that is what the CEO says the model did in the run up to this particular case. Someone with an 80 IQ and an elementary school grasp of English is going to get absolutely dragged by the system with or without a "robot lawyer" if they insist on fighting without competent representation, but they'd probably still stand a better chance of getting off a fine on a technicality if they weren't paying a VC-backed startup to write a letter make sure the cops turned up to testify against them. They'd also be more likely to not get absolutely dragged if they listened to a human that told them not to bother than a signup flow that encouraged them to purchase further legal representation to pursue the case.