A man appearing before a New York court got a scolding from a judge after he tried to use an avatar generated by artificial intelligence to argue his case.
Yeah honestly I don’t see a problem with this. If it’s his own words why does it matter if it’s AI speaking or himself? Even if it’s not his own words, he could just as easily say the same shit on camera, why does the person in the video needs to be him?
why does it matter if it’s AI speaking or himself?
Because he’s advertising his AI product in the courtroom. He was present in the courtroom as well, and he lied about having a “speech impediment” to get his AI on screen in the courtroom.
The avatar is an unnecessary distraction. Can the video be just audio? Use that. Can the video be audio and text? Use that.
Plus if plaintiffs and defendants can sometimes get away with certain outcomes because of what they look like (this has been studied and observed), imagine criminals using cute little teens that happen to look like the judges’ kids to argue the case.
I’d say a compromise would be that the avatar be the same for all court cases; chosen by the court system. I’d be sort of okay with this.
And the whole AI destroying the planet is a topic for another moment.
All good points but keep in mind the current system is racist
So, even if avatars were allowed to happen tomorrow night… You’d still have a “oh no, the system chose a black person for you, good luck…” Unsolved dilemma
That’s why I said that the avatar should be the same for all court cases. Let’s say Microsoft Office Clippy, though it could have been a stick-man or Bob Ross.
Yeah honestly I don’t see a problem with this. If it’s his own words why does it matter if it’s AI speaking or himself? Even if it’s not his own words, he could just as easily say the same shit on camera, why does the person in the video needs to be him?
Because he’s advertising his AI product in the courtroom. He was present in the courtroom as well, and he lied about having a “speech impediment” to get his AI on screen in the courtroom.
That’s the issue here.
The avatar is an unnecessary distraction. Can the video be just audio? Use that. Can the video be audio and text? Use that.
Plus if plaintiffs and defendants can sometimes get away with certain outcomes because of what they look like (this has been studied and observed), imagine criminals using cute little teens that happen to look like the judges’ kids to argue the case.
I’d say a compromise would be that the avatar be the same for all court cases; chosen by the court system. I’d be sort of okay with this.
And the whole AI destroying the planet is a topic for another moment.
All good points but keep in mind the current system is racist
So, even if avatars were allowed to happen tomorrow night… You’d still have a “oh no, the system chose a black person for you, good luck…” Unsolved dilemma
Good food for thought all around
That’s why I said that the avatar should be the same for all court cases. Let’s say Microsoft Office Clippy, though it could have been a stick-man or Bob Ross.