By Kaveh Waddell | Axios
A court hands down an opinion: thoughtfully reasoned, forcefully argued, eminently fair. It’s lauded widely — until it comes out that the author wasn’t a renowned judge but rather an advanced artificial intelligence system.
The big question: Should the opinion be rejected because of its source, even if it’s indistinguishable from — or better than — what a human would have produced?
Even though today’s AI is woefully unprepared for the job, legal scholars are already debating whether computers should someday be entrusted with enormous legal decisions.
Experts differ on whether it’s sufficient for an AI judge to perfectly emulate a human one, given that it’s not actually capable of “thinking” like a person.
