Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Robot Lawyers Solve Problems

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the the-jokes-just-write-themselves dept.

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."

7 of 157 comments (clear)

  1. ha by c0dedude · · Score: 5, Funny

    In recent future, robot sues you!

    --
    Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
  2. Looks like SCO ... by DrJimbo · · Score: 4, Funny
    ... will have to find a new business model.

    --
    We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
    -- Anais Nin
  3. I mark this story (-1, Flamebait) by boingyzain · · Score: 5, Funny

    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

  4. Stupid article title by dcam · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  5. At least by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 4, Funny

    At least we can be reasonably sure that the robotic legislator actually read the thing first.

  6. * call to aol * by know1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    "hi, i'm calling to cancel my aol subscription"
    "i'm afraid i can't do that dave"

  7. Re:OMFG! by Eivind · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Actually, it also works, if legally binding in the huge amounts of cases where one side is *not* in good faith, and the other side simply needs a legal document to, basically, say so.

    For example, the large majority of arbited disputes in the norwegian "Forliksråd" runs something like this:

    • One side in some relation refuses to deal with something he/she/it should. Could be a customer that ignores paying his bill, a business that doesn't respond to requests to warranty-repair a defective computer (I had this happen to me), whatever. You try for a while, but after your second formal letter of complaint is ignored you realize it's time to either give up, or get the law behind you.
    • You deliver a complaint to the Forliksråd with a written account of how you see the case. (you don't need to document anything, only explain.)
    • Complaint is delivered to other part, along with information that an answer is to be delivered within 14 days, or the "forliksråd" will be forced to conclude that you agree with the accusations.
    • No response comes.
    • Forliksråd decides you are rigth in your claims and issue a ruling to this effect.
    • Other part is informed of the ruling, and the fact that it becomes legally bindable if it is not appealed within a month.
    • Other part ignores this too. One month passes.
    At this point you've got a legal judgement, and can use any of the means available for getting your money. In the case of a consumer having a dispute with a business the simplest way of getting the money is simply to go demand the business be bankrupted, as it has legal, undisputed, but still unpaid bills. I did this.

    It's interesting how a company that's been ignoring your demands to fix their shit for a year is suddenly capable of bringing a courier to your house with full payment, within *the*hour* of them, their bank, their investors, and the entire board of Trustees learning that they are, legally, bankrupt this time next week unless they can show proof that they've paid the bill.

    Arbitration with no legal force is, however, as you say, pointless unless both sides actually want to reach an agreement.