← Back to context Comment by rrr_oh_man 8 hours ago That's a common fantasy of developers who haven't touched grass in a while. 4 comments rrr_oh_man Reply bonoboTP 7 hours ago It's a rehashing of Leibniz's "Calculemus!".It's not a fully stupid idea, many rules can be automated and indeed have already been. The things that courts still have to decide manually are the leftovers that require more human judgment. fph 6 hours ago This pipe dream will soon be replaced by "let's have the first degree of judgment be ChatGPT; human judges should only deal with appeals". rrr_oh_man 4 hours ago Sounds like every self-driving startup krzyk 4 hours ago Why is it a fantasy to have a fair system with no room for interpretation?
bonoboTP 7 hours ago It's a rehashing of Leibniz's "Calculemus!".It's not a fully stupid idea, many rules can be automated and indeed have already been. The things that courts still have to decide manually are the leftovers that require more human judgment. fph 6 hours ago This pipe dream will soon be replaced by "let's have the first degree of judgment be ChatGPT; human judges should only deal with appeals". rrr_oh_man 4 hours ago Sounds like every self-driving startup
fph 6 hours ago This pipe dream will soon be replaced by "let's have the first degree of judgment be ChatGPT; human judges should only deal with appeals". rrr_oh_man 4 hours ago Sounds like every self-driving startup
It's a rehashing of Leibniz's "Calculemus!".
It's not a fully stupid idea, many rules can be automated and indeed have already been. The things that courts still have to decide manually are the leftovers that require more human judgment.
This pipe dream will soon be replaced by "let's have the first degree of judgment be ChatGPT; human judges should only deal with appeals".
Sounds like every self-driving startup
Why is it a fantasy to have a fair system with no room for interpretation?