Ross: Attorney built on top of IBM's Watson

Re:Ross: Attorney built on top of IBM's Watson by nodata on Thursday January 29, 2015 @02:25AM (#8964795)

and if I want Ross to help me sue IBM, does Ross act independently? :)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ross: Attorney built on top of IBM's Watson by deciplex on Thursday January 29, 2015 @02:39AM (#8964830)

That would be a violation of Directive 4. So no.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ross: Attorney built on top of IBM's Watson by hackuser on Thursday January 29, 2015 @11:44AM (#8967204)

> and if I want Ross to help me sue IBM, does Ross act independently? :)

I know you are joking, but your comment is a good response to the other commenter who wished for a future when law is administered by a "benevolent AI". Who writes the code for the AI?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ross: Attorney built on top of IBM's Watson by raverbashing on Thursday January 29, 2015 @03:19AM (#8964937)

So it will be IBM vs IBM

IBM wins of course. And the lawyers

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ross: Attorney built on top of IBM's Watson by nodata on Thursday January 29, 2015 @04:14AM (#8965095)

Ross would have to win, otherwise IBM's product looks like a dud.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ross: Attorney built on top of IBM's Watson by spacemanmatt on Thursday January 29, 2015 @08:02AM (#8965810)

So IBM folds to protect its reputation and the robot's ego. Oh, maybe implementing ego was a poor choice after all.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ross: Attorney built on top of IBM's Watson by caskance on Thursday January 29, 2015 @09:31AM (#8966288)

We should probably ask Euathlus.

[ Parent | on HN ]