1. I would plead guilty. If I committed a crime, I did so for a reason, so I might as well use the opportunity to make my voice heard.
2. Same answer
3. Maybe some day, as AI improves. In this story, AI attempts to replicate human bias, which is counterintuitive. The reason for using AI would not be expedience, but to get around human bias. However, as it is now, AI is unable to differentiate between true and false information. It cannot think, and therefor is useless for matters of judgment.
4. No. Innocent people have been pressured to plead guilty. It's a mockery of the ideals the system was built on.
5. I think people should be allowed to have their trial overseen by someone who has the potential to understand their background. Matching ethnicity, gender, etc. would significantly reduce negative bias in court cases.
Thank you for taking the time to write out such thoughtful answers! Hopefully more people will do the same and chime in with thoughts and comments on your answers! Interesting you would plead guilty to something you know you did. That's a rare answer indeed, most people want to make the state prove their case with evidence!
True, I do know a lot of people who would not agree with my decision there. And you know, if I were faced with the reality of it, who knows if I would really hold to my conviction? I value truth and I hope I would stand by it, but you don't really know what you'd do until you're there, right?
Jun 27Liked by Tina Lee Forsee, After Dinner Conversation
This is insanely compelling and a terrifying glimpse at a possible future. I worry that AI would not be able to factor in emotional matters when making decisions. Plus, there is a huge opportunity to abuse databases and tamper with codes to try and get a 'favourable' outcome for those who have more power over court proceedings. I really enjoyed reading this, and thinking about all of the moral sides of the idea - thanks so much!
Good point! And the story seems to suggest the AI was tampered with, at least in the sense that it gives more favorable sentences simply by choosing it over a human judge. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
It's a tough question for sure. On the one side, you would hope AI would be less bias. But AI is programmed by people and large data models, which can show bias. It's a tough question, but one that is likely to come up in the future.
1. I would plead guilty. If I committed a crime, I did so for a reason, so I might as well use the opportunity to make my voice heard.
2. Same answer
3. Maybe some day, as AI improves. In this story, AI attempts to replicate human bias, which is counterintuitive. The reason for using AI would not be expedience, but to get around human bias. However, as it is now, AI is unable to differentiate between true and false information. It cannot think, and therefor is useless for matters of judgment.
4. No. Innocent people have been pressured to plead guilty. It's a mockery of the ideals the system was built on.
5. I think people should be allowed to have their trial overseen by someone who has the potential to understand their background. Matching ethnicity, gender, etc. would significantly reduce negative bias in court cases.
Thank you for taking the time to write out such thoughtful answers! Hopefully more people will do the same and chime in with thoughts and comments on your answers! Interesting you would plead guilty to something you know you did. That's a rare answer indeed, most people want to make the state prove their case with evidence!
True, I do know a lot of people who would not agree with my decision there. And you know, if I were faced with the reality of it, who knows if I would really hold to my conviction? I value truth and I hope I would stand by it, but you don't really know what you'd do until you're there, right?
This is insanely compelling and a terrifying glimpse at a possible future. I worry that AI would not be able to factor in emotional matters when making decisions. Plus, there is a huge opportunity to abuse databases and tamper with codes to try and get a 'favourable' outcome for those who have more power over court proceedings. I really enjoyed reading this, and thinking about all of the moral sides of the idea - thanks so much!
Good point! And the story seems to suggest the AI was tampered with, at least in the sense that it gives more favorable sentences simply by choosing it over a human judge. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
It's a tough question for sure. On the one side, you would hope AI would be less bias. But AI is programmed by people and large data models, which can show bias. It's a tough question, but one that is likely to come up in the future.