<story><title>AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court</title><url>https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ai-powered-robot-lawyer-takes-its-first-court-case/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>paxys</author><text>I disagree. Technology is the perfect solution for problems like these. So many societal issues today arise because systems developed centuries ago cannot keep up with a population that has grown exponentially since then. Tech&amp;#x27;s core feature is being able to scale. There will be more and more systemic reliance on automation and AI as time goes on, since that&amp;#x27;s the only sensible way out.</text></item><item><author>ausbah</author><text>&amp;gt;The ultimate goal, according to Browder, is to democratize legal representation by making it free for those who can&amp;#x27;t afford it, in some cases eliminating the need for pricey attorneys.&lt;p&gt;this is the core issue I have with companies and tech like this: they try to solve social issues with technology and business. the issue of accessible defense is an issue of institutional failure that rests on the shoulders of the state. tech i think may bandage the problem, but just like how Tesla won&amp;#x27;t solve green travel this won&amp;#x27;t fix the underlying issue</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>fasthands9</author><text>While I agree that technology is the solution I disagree AI has anything to do with this.&lt;p&gt;This &amp;quot;AI Lawyer&amp;quot; is about a traffic ticket. If we want to make things more fair while also enforcing the laws on the book it seems like the more straightforward tech solution is to improve traffic cameras&amp;#x2F;monitors such that tickets are given out more appropriately. Or, if it still goes to court, why not just have a system where someone can represent themselves with a form or checklist which points out the reasons they were given a ticket by mistake?&lt;p&gt;Perhaps this is a good business model in the current system but its definitely not the best for society as a whole. Why do we need lawyer of any type to handle something as banal as speeding tickets?</text></comment>
<story><title>AI-powered lawyer will be first of its kind to represent defendant in court</title><url>https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ai-powered-robot-lawyer-takes-its-first-court-case/</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>paxys</author><text>I disagree. Technology is the perfect solution for problems like these. So many societal issues today arise because systems developed centuries ago cannot keep up with a population that has grown exponentially since then. Tech&amp;#x27;s core feature is being able to scale. There will be more and more systemic reliance on automation and AI as time goes on, since that&amp;#x27;s the only sensible way out.</text></item><item><author>ausbah</author><text>&amp;gt;The ultimate goal, according to Browder, is to democratize legal representation by making it free for those who can&amp;#x27;t afford it, in some cases eliminating the need for pricey attorneys.&lt;p&gt;this is the core issue I have with companies and tech like this: they try to solve social issues with technology and business. the issue of accessible defense is an issue of institutional failure that rests on the shoulders of the state. tech i think may bandage the problem, but just like how Tesla won&amp;#x27;t solve green travel this won&amp;#x27;t fix the underlying issue</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>somenameforme</author><text>Tech often misses obvious downsides, especially human, in pursuit of unrealistic idealism.&lt;p&gt;A good lawyer is not just knowledgeable of law, but of people. He needs to get 12 people in front of him to agree with him. And he may even be actively misleading them when he&amp;#x27;s defending a someone whom he knows to be guilty. This comes down to reading people, reading reactions, and understanding what each of those 12 people needs to hear to have them act like he wants. Not coincidentally, the most common background of politicians: lawyers.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;d argue that the most likely scenario here is not closing the divide but widening it. Instead of public defenders, poor people will just get the bot, while those of means will get lawyers. It&amp;#x27;s akin to tech support today. In the not so distant past, it was easy to get a human on the line. Now in many cases unless you&amp;#x27;re a &amp;quot;special&amp;quot; client, or get your issue on the front page of some big social media site, you get the bot. And it sucks.</text></comment>