If so, we don’t need lawyers…
https://webspace.science.uu.nl/~prakk101/pubs/oratieHPdefENG.pdf
Can Computers Argue Like a Lawyer?
… My own research falls within two subfields of AI: AI & law and computational argumentation. It is therefore natural to discuss today the question whether computers can argue like a lawyer. At a first glance, the answer seems trivial, because if ChatGPT is asked to provide arguments for or against a legal claim, it will generate them. And even before ChatGPT, many knowledge-based AI systems could do the same. But the real question is of course: can computers argue as well as a good human lawyer can? And that is the question I want to discuss today.
Could we put AI in jail?
The Criminal Liability of Artificial Intelligence Entities
The rapid evolution of information technologies has led to the emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) entities capable of autonomous actions with minimal human intervention. While these AI entities offer remarkable advancements, they also pose significant risks by potentially harming individual and collective interests protected under criminal law. The behavior of AI, which operates with limited human oversight, raises complex questions about criminal liability and the need for legislative intervention. This article explores the profound transformations AI technologies have brought to various sectors, including economic, social, political, medical, and digital domains, and underscores the challenges they present to the legal framework. The primary aim is to model the development of criminal legislation that effectively addresses the unique challenges posed by AI, ensuring security and safety. The article concludes that existing legal frameworks are inadequate to address the complexities of AI-related crimes. It recommends the urgent development of new laws that establish clear criminal responsibility for AI entities, their manufacturers, and users. These laws should include specific penalties for misuse and encourage the responsible integration of AI across various sectors. A balanced approach is crucial to harness the benefits of AI while safeguarding public interests and maintaining justice in an increasingly AIdriven world
Interesting. AI as a philosopher?
https://philpapers.org/rec/TSUPAL
Possibilities and Limitations of AI in Philosophical Inquiry Compared to Human Capabilities
Traditionally, philosophy has been strictly a human domain, with wide applications in science and ethics. However, with the rapid advancement of natural language processing technologies like ChatGPT, the question of whether artificial intelligence can engage in philosophical thinking is becoming increasingly important. This work first clarifies the meaning of philosophy based on its historical background, then explores the possibility of AI engaging in philosophy. We conclude that AI has reached a stage where it can engage in philosophical inquiry. The study also examines differences between AI and humans in terms of statistical processing, creativity, the frame problem, and intrinsic motivation, assessing whether AI can philosophize in a manner indistinguishable from humans. While AI can imitate many aspects of human philosophical inquiry, the lack of intrinsic motivation remains a significant limitation. Finally, the paper explores the potential for AI to offer unique philosophical insights through its diversity and limitless learning capacity, which could open new avenues for philosophical exploration far beyond conventional human perspectives.
No comments:
Post a Comment