News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Astra for Law by mt_ on Thursday September 17, 2026 @05:22PM (#49746727)
The legal system, which is a machine/technology by itself, will be eaten out. I wonder what will replace it. Botnet law arbitrage? – Personal assistants constantly negotiating with each other to avoid permanent civil lawsuits?

the cost of making a legal argument can collapse while the cost of reaching an enforceable, legitimate decision may go higher, which will gate the "justice" system even more.

Re:Astra for Law by alexfringes on Thursday September 17, 2026 @05:40PM (#49746961)
You presented the concern from my adjacent comment perfectly (“LLM performance: common law vs civil law” essentially). So is AI possibly just growing the “Reverence for Professional Experience” factor that plays such a big role for legal compensation here in the US?
Re:Astra for Law by iphonecorridor on Thursday September 17, 2026 @05:52PM (#49747109)
The legal system is slow and inefficient by design.
Re:Astra for Law by rayiner on Thursday September 17, 2026 @06:25PM (#49747522)
It's really not. The legal system is slow and inefficient because it's a deeply pipelined system built to maximize the throughput of the bottleneck resource: judges. Judges are constitutional officers who exercise independent authority in meat space and thus are necessarily limited in number. The rest of the design flows from that.

If you got the judge, all the parties, and all the witnesses in a conference room together until the case was resolved, you could probably handle a lawsuit in a few months. But each judge has hundreds of cases pending before them, so that would never work. Instead, you get something like how a GPU works. You do some work on a case, submit the work to the court, then work on something else for a few months while you wait around to get the results back. Then you do some more work and submit it to the court, then go do something else for a few months while you wait to get the results back. A few months of actual work gets spread out over a few years that way.

Re:Astra for Law by 10000truths on Thursday September 17, 2026 @08:20PM (#49748628)
Why stop there? The bottleneck is not some immutable force of nature. The number of judges is determined by legislative action. It is within Congress's power to allocate new federal judicial seats, and likewise at the state level with the equivalent lawmaking body (for most states, at least). Why don't they do so?
Re:Astra for Law by rayiner on Thursday September 17, 2026 @08:27PM (#49748694)
Because federal district court judges have a tremendous amount of power. You both don't want 10,000 of them running around and you don't want to water down the qualification for the position--if you did do that, then that would devalue their judgments, everyone would appeal, and you'd just shift the bottleneck up to the appellate courts.

At the end of the day, litigation is conflict resolution. You don't just need a decision, you need a decision from someone authoritative enough to bully Fortune 500 CEOs into submission to accept the judgment.

Re:Astra for Law by JumpCrisscross on Thursday September 17, 2026 @05:54PM (#49747137)
The legal system is robust and deliberate by design. That winds up being necessarily slow. But it doesn't need to be inefficient.
Re:Astra for Law by WolfeReader on Thursday September 17, 2026 @05:45PM (#49747027)
I am not sure "eaten out" was the correct phrase to use here.
Re:Astra for Law by pbkompasz on Thursday September 17, 2026 @05:39PM (#49746955)
Call it a Prediction Market