Trayvon Martin Case

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Lawyers would never allow it to happen because then they couldn't pick the dumbest people on earth to sit on a jury.

Damn it! Voire dire just pissed on my argument!

[JoeRedskin]

Dismissive of technology? No. A belief that it can achieve perfection in governance? Likewise, no.

Open to superstition? Where oh where is the "Captain Deflection" avatar when you need it?!
<points and laughs at RR>

[JoeRedskin]

I'm done. I'll be back when we are discussing the Martin case again.

RR, thanks for a wonderfully amusing extended lunch. Watching you twist your way to the conclusion that a roomfull of programers overseen by a judicial rules committee could create an omniscient machine dispensing a new and improved justice for all has been beyond amusing. Thank you.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

It's interesting to me to see how people are dismissive of technology and yet completely open to superstition.

That's fascinating....

I am not dismissive of technology at all. Give me problems which require pure data analysis and strict guidelines and I am all for it. I would love, for example, if all cars drove themselves. What I don't yet see any proof of is fuzzy logic reaching anywhere near the sophistication needed to handle ethical jurisprudence. So far all you have offered is a group of programmers guided by judicial ovesight with some adaptive logic added.

Let me ask, for clarity, are you saying that a replacement system could be made with today's technology, or are you sugesting we should, as a society, set the development of said system as a goal like the race to the moon of old.

[RedskinRat]

Almost my last post on the topic for anyone left who cares:

Google: Can/Should Computers Replace Judges?, by Anthony D'Amato,* 11 Georgia Law Review 1277-1301 (1977)

[mlmpetert]

Ive never seen so many quotes in a thread before! One thing ive never been able to do is quote different sentances or points in what someone says and keep the "originally posted by warpathwinner" tag, for each and every sentance or point. Is it hard to do?

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

Is it hard to do?

No, it's not.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

That has been true for most systems but now we're looking at AI becoming a reality. At what point would you declare a system sentient?

When it hires a lawyer.

(Sorry, could not resist).

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

Ive never seen so many quotes in a thread before! One thing ive never been able to do is quote different sentances or points in what someone says and keep the "originally posted by warpathwinner" tag, for each and every sentance or point. Is it hard to do?

Just cut and paste the original quote header ([ mlmpetert;920072 ]) before each partial quote and end it with the close quote portion. Its not hard. But if you miss a bracket or / then it gets odd looking fast

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Just cut and paste the original quote header ([ mlmpetert;920072 ]) before each partial quote and end it with the close quote portion. Its not hard. But if you miss a bracket or / then it gets odd looking fast

I thought that there was an easier way to do it thats embeded in the normal Quote feature that i was missing.

What Joeredskins did above when quoting 2 different people makes perfect sense. But when its the same person i dont see the need to repost there SN each and every time. Seems like overkill. Just my humble 2 cents.

Also Im against robot judges.

[Lotus]

If we have robot judges, I'm infecting the judge with a computer virus which will ensure my victory. Call it a cyber-bribe.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by Lotus

If we have robot judges, I'm infecting the judge with a computer virus which will ensure my victory. Call it a cyber-bribe.

Oh no! You've just found the kryptonite to RR's master plan to make robots rule humankind!

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

When it hires a lawyer.

(Sorry, could not resist).

Now that was an awesome line.

Two computers are at an internet cafe

One looks at the other and says what are you having?
The other replies a cup of java and byte to eat.

[12thMan]

Wait, I didn't bother to read all the gibberish about computer judges? Is that right?

[saden1]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Wait, I didn't bother to read all the gibberish about computer judges? Is that right?

Yes, I believe RedskinRat wants to commission the development of a Perfect Judge™ computer capable of eliminating human error in our judicial system. A highly noble endeavor though he leaves much to be desired when it comes to divulging details of the system.