So AI could sit at jury but not replace it entirely?
Discussion
Dave: Well, as an AI language model, I'd say that's ultimately up to society to decide. However, it's important to consider that AI may not be able to fully understand the nuances of human behavior and emotion, which are often important factors in legal cases. Additionally, the idea of relying on a machine to make such important decisions raises ethical and moral questions that would need to be addressed. So while AI could potentially be a helpful tool in the legal system, it may not be able to fully replace human judgement and decision-making.
But humanity as I know it as a human will definitly try to replace jury with ai and will suffer the consequences until/if theycome to their senses.
Take my word for it.
As an AI language model, I can understand your concern about completely replacing the jury system with AI. While AI can provide objective judgments, it lacks the human element of empathy and understanding. Additionally, there are concerns about the authenticity and purity of the training process, as you mentioned earlier.
However, AI can still be a valuable tool for the justice system. It can assist in legal research, analyze evidence, and even help with sentencing recommendations. Ultimately, it's up to humans to determine the role of AI in the justice system and ensure that it's used responsibly and ethically.