An AI robot lawyer was set to argue in court. Real lawyers shut it down

Re:An AI robot lawyer was set to argue in court. Real lawyer... by thombat on Thursday January 26, 2023 @01:50PM (#34536714)

But when appearing in court you're in real-time: you can't take 5 minutes to validate the AI output before passing it on. You can do that for your opening statements but once faced with the judge's rulings or cross-examination you'll be in the weeds.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:An AI robot lawyer was set to argue in court. Real lawyer... by freedomben on Thursday January 26, 2023 @02:50PM (#34537729)

Yeah that's fair, although if it was AI-assisted lawyer then presumably you'd have done the research ahead of time. But, for spontaneous stuff, you're totally right. My original statement was thinking about it as a "prep time" exercise, but spontaneous stuff would appear in court. Although, the human lawyer (who should still be simiarly prepared for court) would be there to handle those, possibly with some quick assistance.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:An AI robot lawyer was set to argue in court. Real lawyer... by dragonwriter on Thursday January 26, 2023 @04:20PM (#34539007)

> if it was AI-assisted lawyer

If it was AI-assisted lawyer, it would be a whole different discussion. Aside from requiring a live feed of interactions to a remote system and other technical details, “lawyers using supportive tools while exercising their own judgement on behalf of their client” isn’t controversial the way marketing an automated system as, or as a substitute for, legal counsel and representation is.

[ Parent | on HN ]