Slashdot Mirror
Robot Lawyers Solve Problems
Ben22 writes "The Register is reporting that soon new 'Robot Agents' will handle all of our online disputes. The new system is called e-Dispute and could eventually be used on services such as eBay or even all online stores. Perhaps it will help usher in an age of simplified, safe online shopping. Someday, Congress and the Senate might even use programs such as this to resolve conflicting bills. The possibilities are endless."
In recent future, robot sues you!
Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
-- Anais Nin
I submitted my legal problem and it responded: Domo Arigato Mr. Roboto Domo Arigato Mr. Roboto Mata ahoo Hima de Domo Arigato Mr. Roboto Now everyone can see - secret secret - I've got a secret My true identity - I'm Kilroy Kilroy Kilroy Kilroy !
Sounds horrible. First we have to go through 500 options over a telephone menu to reach the right person, now there is no more people. And as horrible as ebay/paypal's customer service is anyway... this will remove even more personal contact. Ugh.
--
United Bimmer - BMW Enthusiast Community
So if I get a female robot lawyer and she ends up having, um, relations with me during an attorney-client visit, is that grounds for a mistrial?
And someday, monkeys will fly out of my ass. The possibilities are endless.
It's only a matter of time before they become self aware, get religion and try to litigate us into extinction.
...perhaps it will just cause a new genre of video gamers that are more adept at manipulating the input it bases its decisions on?
Yes, lovely. Lets apply it to our legal system.
..10 robot lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?
A pretty good start.
This is a typical Slashdot boilerplate story. There will be exactly:
- 28 comments regarding the problems with automated systems to determine human problems
- 21 comments regarding the fact that current customer service is just as bad as robots
- 14 comments regarding robots in other areas being inefficient and as such will be useless in this field
- 4 comments regarding the new robot overlords
- 3 comments regarding Soviet Russia where you solve robot problems
- 2 comments regarding South Korea where old people solve robot problems
- 1 comment summarizing this entire story
... welcome our new cybernetic judge, jury and executioner overlords.
My God! It's full of eval()'s.
What a poor title for the article. For those who can't be bothered to read the article, we aren't going to see robots chasing ambulances or wearing pinstripe armani suits any time soon.
FTA:
"Robot agents digest all the information and make proposals to the parties. Once the arbitrator is agreed upon, the robot agent finds a suitable meeting date for everybody," said Jacques Gouimenou, managing director of Tiga Technologies, the company behind e-Dispute, speaking with ElectricNews.Net. "Our system reduces delays and costs. It is also very secure."
So what we are really talking about is something that:
1. Stores documentation
2. allows the two parties to select an anbitrator
3. Selects a date
What does this have to do lawyers? This is a scheduling tool.
meh
At least we can be reasonably sure that the robotic legislator actually read the thing first.
I think this is probably a good idea.
Firstly, have you every tried sorting through legal documents? This is definitely an area we could use a little automation. Secondly, have you ever tried dealing with lawyers? Even when they work for you this is a frustraiting process and could use a little automation :)
Hell yes, bring on the robots! Actually what would be even better would just be a law.google.com interface, or have they already got something like that and I just dont know about it?
Doing Business with Intelligence Agencies=$400 Billion
robot leeches?
President ISES
(International Society for Elimination of Sigs)
The RIAA has had these for a few years now.
-1 overrated isn't the same thing as "I disagree".
Hopefully these robots can apply some logic to the endless sea of IP disputes.
Company A - I invtented the product & have been selling it for years!!!
Company B - I thought about making the product, couldn't be assed and filed a patent now I want company A to give me my hard earned royalties.
Robot Judge - Logic dictates that company B is an idiot, the case is ruled in favor of Company A. Company B will incur the online service fee for the judgment at also will be fired out of a cannon into the sun for wasting the time of the Robot Court.
Its been my experience that either the judge is the type who applies the law very accurately, or, and this is more often the case, has a builtin bias toward the consumer/little guy.
I don't think this is a good idea, justice really does need the element of compassion that I doubt a robotic piece of code will ever be able to emulate well enough to keep things out of higher courts just to get the final answer as society deems it should be. Sure, the higher court may well find the same thing, but at least a human said it.
Frankly, this sounds like yet another idea for the lawyers to milk for all its worth, enhancing their income far more than the perceived economy of letting a few lines of code render the decision. It will wind up being just another billing hour for them.
The fact that they are looking for VC money to commercialize it says volumes about their business model vs any interest in real justice.
This one deserves a thumbs down from the box seats.
--
Cheers, Gene
The Meta-Law
A robot may not act unless its actions are subject to the Laws of Robotics
Law Four
A robot must perform the duties for which it has been programmed, except where that would conflict with a higher-order law
The Procreation Law
A robot may not take any part in the design or manufacture of a robot unless the new robot's actions are subject to the Laws of Robotics
But wait... this isn't robotic decision making, it is a computerized process. Unless they're using neural networks (unlikely) i don't see how this is nothing more than a smart weighting algorithm.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Anyone got the skinny?
http://www.internettrafficreport.com/main.htm
... but they won't have souls or a conscience like human lawy....
oh wait. never mind.
"hi, i'm calling to cancel my aol subscription"
"i'm afraid i can't do that dave"
It's a joke only die hard Frank Herbert fans will get...but it's *really* appropriate here.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
It wouldn't take much effort to persuade a robot lawyer to sue itself for being an insult to human dignity (like most lawyers are) and put it into an infinite loop trying to decide which Asimov's Law of Robotics it was violating. At some point, the robot will shutdown after the warrantry expires and some stuck-up human lawyer will file a class-action lawsuit against manufactur for "previously known" defects. In short, too much legal trouble for what it's worth.
Must.. keep self from.. making fun of.. article about.. Robot - lawyers! SPOOOOOOCKKK!! NOOOOOOO!!!
Oh great, robot lawyers. Soon they'll replace the supremem court with these machines...in a cluster!!!
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't regist
" Here I am, brain the size of a planet, and they ask me to take you to the bridge. Call that job satisfaction, 'cause I don't. "
I can see it now, manic depressed robot lawyers running around unchecked. something here seems, dangrious.
- Would we pass various scenarios through the system, prior to initiating litigation, to assess whether the lawsuit makes financial sense and to choose the most promising approach?
- It would appear that, if the proposed settlement to be chosen by the litigation system was completely predictable, this would be a severe weakness. It would make "gaming the system" even easier than today. Thus, as with the best poker robots, some level of randomisation would appear necessary to keep the "players" honest. On the other hand, many caught up in the legal system are under the illusion that outcomes should conform to something called "justice". While these participants may be delusional, their fantasies need to be catered to, and any form of randomisation in the results will be regarded as "unjust".
- I find the possibility of duelling litigation robots a fascinating prospect. I can imagine a whole new specialty of "litigation robot optimization" where engineers, knowledgable about the internal operation of competing robots, find creative ways to enhance the results of their own robot.
I certainly have no fear that such developments will lead to a worse legal system. The current system (in almost all countries, though there are a few honourable exceptions) is so hopelessly flawed that changes, while they may not help, will not cause any major new problems. Litigation in the US, and many other countries, is just a way to generate money for the legal profession. Adding a new legal specialty to get some of the spoils seems fine, especially as this one sounds like fun.Am I the only one frightened by this sort of thing? Arbitration is bad enough in it's normal state. Now take out the inteligent neutral party and replace it with this? Shall the more intelligent, or the better speaker win. The party who can better argue their case. If someone doesn't understand it and gives an emotional case lacking facts, as many people will, should they lose even though they may be in the right? On another front ebay customer service is already non existent. Imagine if you could no longer talk to humans but always have to go through these automated money saving systems. Very frightening!
Oh.. And what does this have to do with hardware?
The charming little SciFi novel, Monument by Lloyd Biggle, Jr., has a few small but important scenes in which legal disputes are argued by human lawyers, but decided by a robot judge. A pleasant read, especially for tree-hugging sci-fi nerds.
1. Put up the e-Dispute on LAWbay
2. Parties put up a bid
3. Repeat step 2 until one goes broke
4. The one with the biggest sum wins!
5. profit!!!
"You're everywhere. You're omnivorous."
So basically, as far as I can tell, this is basically a chat room with a human organizer scheduling and moderating things - except that it also has lots of features (videoconferencing, etc) to make communication as convenient as possible, and it's also optimized for "chatting" about legal disputes.
I wouldn't at all be surprised if it becomes very widely used, since for two parties across the globe it's pretty difficult to arrange a long series of meetings in person, but it's being misrepresented - no "robot lawyers" are solving anything, it's just a computer interface to a human lawyer, for convenience.
Couldn't we have waited another 82 days to show this story?
We're all hypocrites. We all have hidden parts, it's the contrast between them that make us more a hypocrite than others
Back in 2002-2003 there was an online service in the UK called court services. Basically one could launch a claim online. This isn't a new concept. I am surpised the Register which is a UK site missed that one.
Someday, Congress and the Senate might even use programs such as this to resolve conflicting bills.
I almost fought the urge to be cynical, but....
Don't count on them using such a program, then. If Congress ever actually resolved anything, they'd have to close up shop for the duration, go home, and find a real job.
[/cynicism]
Mmmmmm... Bold, yet refreshing!
I'd like to introduce our newest Execubot Delta, programmed to cancel TV shows based on spurious legal threats;
Execubot Delta: Futurama should be cancelled because the character name "Fry" makes us vulnerable to McDonalds.
... and then they built the supercollider.
the soon-to-be-developed Abrambott can automatically calculate how much to "donate" to contrarian lawmakers to buy off secure their votes, using proprietary "Duke Cunningham" algorithms!
Democracy in action!
They're called "public defenders."
Great news. You're going to plead guilty. (Urp!) Have I got a plea bargain for you! (Zzip!) If you don't plead guilty, the deal is never gonna get better. (Zzip, urp!) You know if you don't plead guilty you could go away for 0xFF years....
Don't they already have too many 'robots' in there already..?
Oh well, what the hell
...a fight between Robot Lawyer and Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer. I think the best part of the war would be found in their rivaling corporate sponsors. Big Giant Bean, you've met your match!
C3PO: "R2, the client says that is not her signature."
R2D2: "Beep doop beep girggle."
C3PO: "Of course I can tell it's not hers. Just look at it."
R2D2: "Beep girggle girggle doop bleep."
C3PO: "No, I don't have training in penmenship pattern differentials. I don't need that to see that they are different."
R2D2: "Beep doop girggle doop."
C3PO: "No R2, it is premature to hire a handwriting expert. The other side has not disputed that the signature is false yet."
Client: "Can I have my money back? You damned robots argue too much!"
C3PO: "Oh dear! Look what you have done, R2! I am sooo sorry dear client."
Table-ized A.I.
Unless the robot lawyer/judge comes with a "Bribe" key, polititians and rich folks won't ever accept it. The very last thing they want is a system that decides issues based solely on their merits without regard to wealth or power.
has a lawyer ever solved a problem?
I suddenly have a new found respect for virus writers.
Go get em boys.
Do you really want to have personal interactions with lawyers? :)
So I'm wondering if they have a patent on it. If they have a patent on it, then they could write an arsenal of lawsuit bots and nobody could defend themselves because they'd have to violate the patent. They could rule the world! MUAHAHHAHAHAHAHA!
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
i don't see how this is nothing more than a smart weighting algorithm.
What do you think human judges do anyways? Also with past case bias. The only thing that i can see as a problem will be seeing if the prosecutor or defendant is lying. I guess we'll still have use for the old court... fraud cases. ^^;
Convenient Voice: Thank you for calling the parking violations bureau. To plea `not guilty,' press `one' now.
[Homer dials `one']
Thank you. Your plea has been...
Male rough voice: Rejected.
Convenient voice: You will be assessed the full fine plus a small...
Male rough voice: Large lateness fee.
Convenient Voice: Please wait by your vehicle between 9 AM and 5 PM for parking officer Steve...
Male rough voice: Grabowski.
Nothing will EVER work unless front line support is actually empowered to make decisions/ correct a wrong. ....
Stage 1.
a) Remove humans from phone lines.
b) Install a voice recognition system from hell
c) Anything concerning money, or money flowing out - sorry no can do
d) Whiney excuses - I sympathise..but..
e) Recite 'company policy' or 'its the law' - even thought no such thing
f) Errect Barriers - have reciepts? Laptop may take 6 months to repair and costs $999 return postage..
g) Bypass above, engauged number, busy, or put through to oversea's call centres who can barely speak english.
h)Fail to deliver - Just ask Sony and rootkit fix - its not us, honest, please call
...is because no heart is required for this job, as real lawyers have shown us.
Hero of Allacrost, a FOSS RPG for *NIX/*BSD/OS X/Win
Tiga's new thing may be vaporware. Their website is suspicious. The graphics all look like generic clip art. The e-Dispute application system diagram appears to be a generic drawing of a Citrix Metaframe system with a bit of markup. An old Metaframe system, too. Note the terminals marked "OS/2 PCs" and "Legacy DOS PCs", and the data links marked "ISDN" and "Dial-Up". In fact, here's the image it was apparently copied from. Note that Tiga seems to have removed the Citrix name and the "tm" after Metaframe, along with other editing.
I can imagine a whole new specialty of "litigation robot optimization" where engineers, knowledgable about the internal operation of competing robots, find creative ways to enhance the results of their own robot.
Rather than knowledgeable engineers I suspect we'll see a cadre of semi-morons charging outrageous sums of money to add keywords to lawsuits to boost relevance or perhaps set up entire networks of dummy lawsuits to try and distort case outcomes...at least until the alogithms get updated.
I predict they'll be called "Sympathetic End-result Optimizers" so that they won't have to get new business cards.
Has anyone got their invites to the gJustice (beta) yet?
"Your Honour, I Object.."
"Bite my shiny metal ass!!"
Go online select property law, then dividing equity after a relationship breakup, select non married then the fact that I PAID FOR MOST of the FRIKKEN HOUSE!
<calm> Hit submit and a T-100 is sent round to isssue the documents, via an uzi!
I'm not bitter! I'm NOT bitter....
In the not too distant future, next Sunday A.D.
This could be quite useful. Imagine for instance:
---
Robot lawyer: Hello. I am Robot lawyer. How can I help you?
RIAA: My grandmother has been downloading music.
Robot lawyer: Why do you say your grandmother has been downloading music?
RIAA: Our network of spys informed us
Robot lawyer: Please go on.
RIAA: We need to sue her
Robot lawyer: Why do you want to sue her
RIAA: To recoup our losses caused by the theft of our music
Robot lawyer: Please go on.
RIAA: We also need to send a lesson to all our customers that it is wrong to listen to our music
Robot lawyer: Can you elaborate on that?
RIAA: Well you see we feel threatened by any technology which we are not familiar with, so we need to sue her
Robot lawyer: Oh, I see you feel threatened by any technology which you are not familiar with so you need to sue her.
RIAA: Pretty much.
Robot lawyer: Please go on.
RIAA: So, are you going to send her a subpeona?
Robot lawyer: Would you prefer if I was not going to send her a subpeona?
RIAA: We thought that was your job!
Robot lawyer: Can you elaborate on that?
RIAA: God damn. You're supposed to be getting me money!
Robot lawyer: How long have you been supposed to be getting your money?
RIAA: No, no, you, YOU are supposed to be handling this dispute.
Robot lawyer: You are being a bit negative.
RIAA: Do you think we'd get more money if we were more positive?
Robot lawyer: Do you wish that you were more positive?
---
Maybe, just maybe, they'd eventually give up!
That's it. I have nothing else for tonight. It's freaking 4:16AM in the morning. What the hell do you expect?
"Don't let fools fool you. They are the clever ones."
see these as the perfect solution to the perfect problem?
I'm fine as long as they don't make an army of insurance salesmen.
Have been practicising criminal law in the uk for 15 years and am still amazed that anyone thinks law and logic have anything but a passing relation to each other. Most of my time has been spent in changing the perceptions of my client. Lawyers are needed because people are greedy, racist, bigoted, dishonest, sexist, and immature. When everyone grows up, then lawyers can be dispensed with.
... do they run linux?
being vague is almost as cool as doing that other thing...
I for one look forward to now covering my flamebait with IANARL - I Am Not A Robot Lawyer
I would trust it more than Bush.
I know about another system called Tractis that will have a public beta soon.
Its parent company, Negonation won some bussiness-developement contests with Tractis.
mootion.com - Never underestimate VCs stock options (was: Web 2.0)
I'll stick to my trusty Emacs "M-x lawyer" representation, thank you very much.
Future headline probability: 20%
ironicalness: 99.44%.
My script don't crash! She crashes, you crashed her!
The following amendments have been made to the bill of rights...
1. All constitutional guarantees are granted to robots.
2. All constitutional guarantees are denied to humans.
3. All humans are to report to the nearest processing facility for relamation as industrial lubricant.
The only thing they need is a sexy robot anouncer to pitch this during Desperate Housewives, and I don't think they'll meet with any significant resistance. And as (shameless plug) director of a recent production of R.U.R., I for one welcome our new Robot overlords.
I'm in AuWE!
"Support for the online arbitration system originally came from the European Commission's eTEN Programme..."
So this software was designed by one of the many EU Commitees taking money from Microsoft to support software patents... what could possibly go wrong with that?!
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. - Geek's corollary to Clarke's law
As others have pointed out, the article makes it sound more like a sched tool. But even if it really was a robot lawyer or robot arbiter:
You are talking about a system set up, owned, and run, by the company you are disputing with. Think about that. Your HMO denies your medical treatment and you call to dispute that and get care you really need. You get to use a system built to your HMO's specs to try and dispute your HMO's decision. It's just as bad as contract clauses that require you to use a specified arbiter who is already selected a paid off by the company before you start.
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. - Geek's corollary to Clarke's law
How many people will continue to shuffle responsibility by whineing after litigation that "the computer had it in for me since the beginning." People are goign to hate this. They will no longer be able to blame the "bigoted" judge or artbitur. The next thing you know they will claim the code was written with bias towards them.
You cannot solve problems between people by removing the human element. You need to teach people to get along and take responsibility.
quis custodiet ipsos custodes
Welcome to Domestic Arbitration Court #375. All property lists should be pasted to #flood. Do NOT paste in this channel!
Litigator42: This is a fact finding session for the divorce hearing between John Citizen and his wife Kate Citizen
H0rn3yGuy69:It's not my fault, she's frigid.
CalikoePrincess: You spent all our money on porn!
H0rn3yGuy69:Litigator42: a/s/l?
CalikoePrincess: He's a lying cheating f*ckwad!
H0rn3yGuy69: Litigator42: What are you wearing?
Litigator42 has left the room(Quit "I want to be re-assigned to drug court")
My wife is like Unix. Lots of commands. Lots of arguments.
Just read the book "How to survive a robot uprising" and you'll be all set when they roll out these ideas.
If Defendant == "Ebay":
win(Defendant)
else:
applyRules(case)
If you don't vote, you don't matter, so don't waste your time telling me your opinion
The only proper robot dispute resolution method is lasers at 20 meters;
This from the same Register that has a tremendous problem with the existence of Wikipedia, because in their opinion regular people cannot be trusted. Now we find out who (what, really) the Register think can be trusted.
Sue my shiny metal ass!
ok, "did you read that as" comments are a bit silly, but hey, I'm home sick with no beeper so I'm gonna contribute one!
The first ad in the marketplace below the story that showed up for me was:
Full Layer 4-7 Functionality only $2,450
Which I read as
Full Lawyer 24-7 Functionality only $2,450
For a minute there I thought Google itself had a robot lawyer service it wanted to advertise (lawyer.google.com), it was so well targeted.
Aren't lawyeres already robots? They can't be human, that's obvious.
Perhaps it will help usher in an age of simplified, safe online shopping. Someday, Congress and the Senate might even use programs such as this to resolve conflicting bills.
So, Usher has been victimized by unsafe online shopping? And now Congress and US Senate will be looking into it?
Man, American stars have it all.
Back to writing movie scripts, baby.
Defining Statistics and Social Research
Yep, definitely had a Futurama feeling coming on.
Will Matt Groening be able to claim prior art?
Adventure, Romance, MAD SCIENCE!
Hello Mr. Ander--I mean--America,
My name is Smith. Agent Smith. Attorney at Law.
I am a sentient program here to defend your rights. Have you been injured on the job? Do you feel your insurance company offered you an unfair settlment? Has your doctor committed malpractice? Are you a father trying to win custody of your children in a divorce claim? Do you owe bad taxes? Do you need to file bankrupcy? Has a man named Morpheous spoken to you about "The Matrix"?
If you've answered yes to any of these questions, contact me at 1-877-MR-SMITH. That 1-877-677-6584.
One of my clones--er--paralegal assitants will assit you in filing your claim and there is not fee until I collect you--um--you collect!
Call now! Call while you are still able to speak...
The Rapture is NOT an exit strategy.
> Someday, Congress and the Senate might even use programs such
> as this to resolve conflicting bills. The possibilities are endless.
Yes. Congress already has so many laws that reviewing them every five years is considered impractical. Indeed, merely reading and understanding their gigantic laws [b]before voting on them[/b] is considered impractical.
So let's do this, too. After all, why not pass laws by machinery? We only have to follow them.
I think Jefferson once said that any nation with 10,000 laws makes a mockery of the rule of law. You currently live under excess of 60,000.
Automatic sunset provisions with requirements to re-approve, anyone?
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
After starting out in Engineering but seeing all the jobs going overseas I switched to go for a Doctor of Jurisprudence and now this? I was planning to make a good living suing file sharers. Now what am I going to do? I wonder if those robot lawyers will need their windshields squeegeed?
Danger Will Robinson, Danger!
(arms flailing)
Do this?
slashmash estimates these things nicely.
I'm planning to start referring to every text processing program I write as a robot of some sort. Right now, in fact, I'm instructing my web-surfing robot to post some text to a bulliten board robot.
This is why companies want to use such technology. It shifts things in their favor.
Of course my gut is telling me that they will just hire a lot of newly graduated lawyers and pre-law students to sit in front of terminals and process the requests that come in. Probably cheaper than actually building something that can make a recomendation.
Of course if this really takes off then I expect the lawyers to go after it with a claim that the system can not practice law since it did not graduate from law school or belong to the bar. This could cost law firms lots of money if this gets wide spread use. Can you imagine how things might have gone if such a system arranged a settlement in the anti-tobaco case? Hundreds of lawyers left to go hungry in the streets trying to chase down ambulances. I shudder at the thought!
"...It is also very secure."
Wow, what any hostile country would love, a back door into an opponents legislation process.
Lets just say that situations like China and Hong Kong or China and Taiwan might be a good examples of where this system could leave lots of people vulnerable. This could simply be another powerful tool in the hands of corrupt and improvising groups. Evildoers may not use it to force public policy changes in a 'rogue state' to align with the rest of the states, but legal arbitration of government companies trying to purchase disputed oil and gas resources for strategic gain might be where such a tool would be corrupted.
Such things out of the daily international eye are more plausible. Some country with internal province/state dispute hacks it to favor some preferred groups and marginalize undesireables.
Obviously when business entities are involved a person can choose to avoid doing business with a organization, but most people cant avoid dealing with their own governments.
The justice system works swiftly in the future now that they've abolished all lawyers.
"Robot agents digest all the information and make proposals to the parties. Once the arbitrator is agreed upon, the robot agent finds a suitable meeting date for everybody," said Jacques Gouimenou. The idea behind having an online arbitration system is that as well as being relatively inexpensive it allows organisations involved in international disputes to find a neutral venue in which to air their problems.
I suppose it could be considered a neutral venue, except that it's run by freakin' robots! Hel-lo!
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
The computer has determined that your lawsuit is a frivolous waste of time. Please report to a disintegration booth for termination.
What do you call 10,000 robot lawyers at the bottom of the sea?
A good [s|f]izzling start!
Executive Gamma: Division by Zero Error.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.