They’d be better off representing themselves than trusting a non-lawyer “lawyer” that subpoenas no-show cops. Not another Andreessen-backed cluster.
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.
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.