Slashdot Mirror
Chatbot that Overturned 160,000 Parking Fines Now Helping Refugees Claim Asylum (theguardian.com)
Elena Cresci, writing for The Guardian: The creator of a chatbot which overturned more than 160,000 parking fines and helped vulnerable people apply for emergency housing is now turning the bot to helping refugees claim asylum. The original DoNotPay, created by Stanford student Joshua Browder, describes itself as "the world's first robot lawyer", giving free legal aid to users through a simple-to-use chat interface. The chatbot, using Facebook Messenger, can now help refugees fill in an immigration application in the US and Canada. For those in the UK, it helps them apply for asylum support. The London-born developer worked with lawyers in each country, as well as speaking to asylum seekers whose applications have been successful. Browder says this new functionality for his robot lawyer is "long overdue". He told the Guardian: "I've been trying to launch this for about six months -- I initially wanted to do it in the summer. But I wanted to make sure I got it right because it's such a complicated issue. I kept showing it to lawyers throughout the process and I'd go back and tweak it.
From what I understand of the current asylum interview process, the key question is "is your life in danger" followed by variations on "prove it." (Sometimes the proof is as simple as pointing to death threats on Facebook.) Does anyone know if coaching this process is what this bot is doing?
I think you mean "helping turn immigrants into asylum seekers"
Evidence please? And not "it's been used 160,000 times".
A simple search in /. for "chatbot parking" turned up this previous article, which indicated that it successfully challenged 160,000 out of 250,000 tickets. So, no, not "it's been used 160,000 times". This is a "it's won 160,000 times". And that was as of June of last year. This NPR piece from earlier this year indicates that its up to 200,000 successful cases now in just three cities, and that its overall success rate with parking tickets stands at around 60%.
You do not expect the MSM to run with that story, they have to make it sound like those military jihadi's are children and women and need help. Btw, NONE are Christians, and NONE are white. surprise!!
I imagine that he is adding features as quickly as he's able to do so, and attacking him for having different priorities than you is unlikely to get him to move faster on to your pet project. You're welcome to set up your own legal advise bot to help people, but to the person that wrote the bot that currently exists, removing victims of terrible violence at risk of losing their very lives is a high priority. Based on your username, I assume you bought into the idea that the recently elected officials would be trying to help people. I hope to God you're right, but every indication so far is that they're simply trying to enrich themselves and their friends. Please reach out to those you voted for and ask them for help, while others help those that the ones you voted for are trying to harm.
Watch for Penguins, they eat Apples and throw rocks at Windows.
Maybe it's not good as a lawyer for a refugee. But if I were a refugee, I'd sure be using it. Asking it questions and copying the answer. There a quite a few idiot lawyers are out there who just care about collecting a pay check - Not defending you, or doing any research on your case. Use AI for questions you would ask a lawyer about your situation. Then ask the lawyer the same questions. If they don't line up with AI's answers go find another lawyer.
A chatbot can not get Congress to fund care for the large increase in veterans Congress decided to create.
Every government form should have chatbot assistance available. The purpose of the government form is to convey information accurately so that help can be delivered to the people that qualify and rule out assistance to people that should be denied - that is the government's intent after all.
If the chatbot helps imrorve the effectiveness of that process, and it seems there is evidence that it does as I have not heard that the 160,000 odd parking citations were overturned improperly, then all for the better.
Nullius in verba
The only problem is see is that this "fix" will probably be in the veterinary sense.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Evidence please? And not "it's been used 160,000 times".
Also if you think the asylum process is as simple as appealing a parking fine, you're fucking high. This guy appears to have more hubris than experience, and it reminds me of the $1 laptop programmes where somehow people without shelter and electricity and maintenance shops were somehow going to benefit from Wikipedia to tell them how to re-build the civilisation that the same cultures that delivered their laptop had destroyed.
While I agree that evidence of the claim would be useful, I also see no evidence of the implied accusation that his system has been unhelpful to anyone.
I can absolutely imagine how this kind of system would be useful to an asylum seeker. Some of the biggest challenges aren't about nuance of law or understanding of precedent. Imagine showing up in an industrialized country, not able to speak the language very well (or at all). You don't know what government agencies you're about to interact with, nor do you know what their roles and responsibilities are. You don't know what processes you're expected to follow, what they are called, what they do, or how they work. You don't know what you're going to be asked to do, produce as evidence, or answer as questions. The specifics of what you'll need to know vary based upon things like where you're from, what kind of danger you're worried about, and whether you are alone or with a family. The process is long and byzantine (despite what Trump thinks) and when you throw in the cultural and language differences in combination with simply just being scared about the future...yeah, wow.
Look at it from another perspective related to something that has to be about one one-hundredth as scary and intense. Say you're going to the DMV for the first time to take a driving test and get a license, and have never had any aspect of the process explained to you before. What would be easier...a sheet of paper explaining all the different things at the DMV and how they work, or a person that you could interactively ask questions of, so that you can find out what you, specifically, need to know and need to do?
For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
I just wanted to offer Internet Points for keeping one's composure when replying, and not scolding or demeaning the questioner. (Which we've all seen plenty of).
You sir, mam, bot(?) are today's coolest poster.
thanks for the reminder, i need to pay a parking ticket.
...and lawyers help created it? Hell must have froze over....or more likely I am missing something. Ok, I generalize, some lawyers may be good persons.
Not that I personally am against it!
4wdloop
How come the chatbot is this good - winning 16:25 cases?
Will govs now produce their version of chatbot for enforcement or judges to use and fight back?
4wdloop
PC answer would actually be: "Sure come on, we care more about you than we do of our own citizens dying under bridges."
Here we have another alt-right snowflake triggered by the fact brown people exist in this world and sometimes have kids with white women.
Evidence please? And not "it's been used 160,000 times".
A simple search in /. for "chatbot parking" turned up this previous article, which indicated that it successfully challenged 160,000 out of 250,000 tickets. So, no, not "it's been used 160,000 times". This is a "it's won 160,000 times". And that was as of June of last year. This NPR piece from earlier this year indicates that its up to 200,000 successful cases now in just three cities, and that its overall success rate with parking tickets stands at around 60%.
The question is, is 60% any better than any other methods. I'd say it's much lower than paying a lawyer at $400 an hour (I know a traffic lawyer who boasts a 90% sucess rate, thats where I got the $400 p/h figure from, I believe him because he doesn't take cases he's certain are going to lose). Here in the UK, the rule of thumb is, if it's issued by a local government, you need a bulletproof excuse to get out of it. If it's issued by a private corporation, just chuck it in the bin (so you don't get a fine for littering).
To issue fines, you need to either take it to court or have a remit from the government to do so. Pretty much the only organisations that I know of who have the power to do that without the local government doing the enforcing are universities (which have to have government issued charters to operate to begin with).
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
What's it to you who he helps? It's like you feel entitled to the fruits of his voluntary labor.
.... we have bigots here that think Indians are Iranian and can't tell the difference between Sikhs and Muslim extremists. I would say get to know a group of people before you start hating them, but then that might make it too hard to actually hate them.
It usually makes it easier. Civil wars are between sides who know each other's ways very well - too well. The more I know people the less I like them in general, irrespective of race etc. I find that the majority of people are actually shits under a civilised veneer. In the UK people are now very familiar with all these different immigrant groups, thanks to SJWs' aim of "multi-culture" being rammed down our throats all the time. The more time goes on, the more that the original UK people are getting fed-up with the newcomers (and the overcrowding that they are causing), and the newcomer groups don't like each other either. I have a Chinese friend who hates black people with a vengence for example.
I think we are heading for a big crunch within the next generation or two, even civil war, which mis-guided idiots like this Browder douchbag are only fuelling.
Turkey has taken in 7 million refugees...I guess one could say they are swimming in refugees...
It sounds like he took a straightforward and simple solution like, a list of advice and rules, and turned it into a complicated guess the verb adventure.
I cannot imagine any situation where simply providing a list of advice would not be easier to use.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
...and lawyers help created it? Hell must have froze over....or more likely I am missing something. Ok, I generalize, some lawyers may be good persons.
Not that I personally am against it!
Of course Hell froze over; Did you NOT hear the Chicago Cubs won the World Series in baseball! Tim S.
Imagine a world without lawyers
Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.