Press Space to continue
Press Space to continue
Embedding AI-assisted adjudication within our courts will be necessary to avoid institutional collapse and displacement by a truly parallel AI legal system. We've been here before. The DMCA effectively deputized online service providers with adjudicating takedown notices given the internet-induced explosion of copyright claims, including through automated systems like ContentID. The difference here is that AI will affect the demand and supply of essentially all areas of law, not just…
curl_justin@curl_justin4h ago
New essay: To keep human judgment, we need AI courts. AI-generated filings are starting to overwhelm courts around the world. The most popular response I’ve heard is to fight AI with AI: If we can just give judges the right tools and training, AI will help them keep pace. But this strikes me as the worst of both worlds. Because we want human judges in the loop, we don’t get the speed and scale benefits of AI. Yet because we expect them to resolve a massive number of cases quickly, judges (or their clerks) may end up leaning on AI more than they mean to or should. This essay offers another way: a parallel AI adjudication track. An AI track — inspired by AI use in private arbitration but formally part of the court system like magistrate judges — would let courts be explicit about how human judgment is allocated. Done right, this would allow courts to process large volumes of cases while ensuring human judges devote their full attention to the cases where their judgment is needed most. Read more in @PaxMachinaMag: https://t.co/xC4JeVky8H