Charity Queret’s Post

In a landmark decision that is stirring discussions across the legal and tech communities, a Washington state judge has recently set a significant precedent by prohibiting the use of AI-enhanced video evidence in a high-profile triple murder trial. This ruling not only underscores the complexities of integrating cutting-edge technologies into our judicial processes but also casts a spotlight on the pressing need for a deeper, more nuanced understanding of AI’s limitations and potential biases, especially in critical contexts like the criminal justice system. At Technolene, we believe that this development is a pivotal moment for both the legal field and the advancement of AI technologies. It raises fundamental questions about how we balance innovation with ethical considerations and the integrity of our legal proceedings. Join us as we dive deeper into this issue, exploring the implications of AI in judicial settings and how we can navigate its challenges to ensure fairness, transparency, and justice. #AI #LegalTech #JusticeSystem #Innovation #EthicsInTech

🏛️ The Department of Justice (DoJ) organizes a multilateral discussion to address the alignment of AI with civil rights, in line with President Biden's AI executive order. 🤝 The meeting focuses on preventing discrimination, promoting equity, and fulfilling the commitments outlined in the executive order. 🔎 Leaders recognize the potential for harm and discrimination associated with AI and stress the importance of public education and comprehensive remedies. ⚖️ The DoJ meeting fulfills the obligations set by the executive order, ensuring that agencies are aligned with its instructions. 🌐 Collaboration among agencies is aimed at protecting the public from harm while harnessing the transformative potential of AI. 📖 For further details, read the original FedScoop article. #AIandCivilRights #DoJInitiative [Link to article]

Our first session on "AI and Justice" has ended. Here are some key insights from the roundtable session: When we talk about AI and justice, it is important to consider two key domains, including Affordability and Access, said Gregory Lewkowicz, the lead of the roundtable session. 🗝 Giulia Gentile pointed out three provocations when considering using AI to transform the guardians of law: 1.     Transformation of law requires being cautious of  internal perceptional justice, epistemological justice, and public perceptional justice 2.     Digitization of courts takes time, it comes with benefits and costs 3.     Being cautious not to create a new divide (Algorithmic CONTROL) 🗝 Samuel Dahan pointed out four problems of the existing generative AI where generative AI can improve upon: 1. Hallucinations 2.  Citations 3. Reasoning 4. Multiplicity 🗝 Marco Giacalone explained three waves of Access to Justice and introduced the new 4th wave. 🌊 1st Wave: Access to legal representatives of individual interests 🌊 2nd Wave: Access to legal representatives of diffuse collective interest 🌊 3rd Wave: Development of a range of alternative dispute resolution 🌊 (New) 4th Wave: Digital Journey: Guiding users through the process to obtain justice. Here is how: ➡ Guide non-expert parties in the best procedure in every situation ➡ Support the parties and the professional involved (not substitute them) ➡ Involve the legal professionals in the AI development process through a human-centred approach where the solution is built around users 🗝 Nele Roekens presented four constraints when it comes to equality associated with AI and justice ➡ Bias in algorithms: Discriminatory towards certain groups (Historical biased can be repeated or reinforced) ➡ The value of privacy (How much freedom would you trade?) ➡ Lack of Transparency (A threat to the rule of law?):  ➡ Digital divide (Will my grandmother be able to use it?) Our local respondent, Pierre Sculier, suggested some key considerations for the AI and Justice: ➡ Justice needs to always remain human (lawyers are crucial in the courtroom) ➡ Involve legal practitioners in the development ➡ Provide access to AI applications to lawyers ☝️Happening Now: Second session of the conference: "AI Procurement and Sandboxing" #Brussels #conference #ai #data #robotics #local #sustainability

🌟 Exciting times ahead in the legal galaxy! 🌟 AI's journey mirrors the calculator's evolution: from checking accuracy to aiding judges. But, just like Yoda said, "Generative AI, making its way into courts, it is." #LegalTech #AIinCourts #JudicialInnovation 🚀 AI's role in courts is expanding, from administrative support to assisting judges in drafting decisions. Judges worldwide are embracing AI like ChatGPT to enhance efficiency and tackle backlog. #EfficiencyBoost #AccessToJustice #LegalDraftingAssistance 🔍 But, with great power comes great responsibility. Challenges abound: biases, data transparency, and ethical concerns. Without proper safeguards, AI can undermine the legitimacy of courts. #AIrisks #DataTransparency #EthicalAI ⚖️ Yet, AI can be a force for good! By enhancing efficiency and quality, it strengthens trust in courts and their decisions. With proper governance and transparency, AI can empower judges and bolster the legitimacy of courts. #TrustInCourts #AIgovernance #LegalInnovation 🛡️ The road ahead requires vigilance. AI literacy among judges and transparent decision-making processes are key. Let's harness AI's potential while safeguarding against its dark side. #AIliteracy #TransparencyInCourts #JudicialEthics 🌌 As we navigate the legal galaxy, let's ensure AI serves justice and upholds the rule of law. Together, we can wield the dual-edge lightsaber of AI innovation responsibly. #AIforJustice #RuleOfLaw #LegalInnovation Copyright © 2024 Looi Teck Kheong.

Check out this blog post to dig deeper into what these kind of systems can and cannot offer: https://lnkd.in/e28rcFV9

I am curious if colleagues working on #AIpolicy have thoughts about this work. More and more jurisdictions have policies saying that people who receive negative decisions made by or with the aid of algorithms should have a right to "appropriate grievance redressal mechanism" but the details are left unspecified. Naveena Karusala has just completed a study of (currently algorithm-free) application and contestation processes in the context of housing/land benefits in the US and India. The goal is to inform future technology design. One finding is the key role of accompaniment (as defined by Paul Farmer): "We find that transparency of information and processes is insufficient to go through with contestation; accompaniment helps applicants logistically and emotionally navigate public services and contestation, influence other stakeholders to achieve better outcomes, and escalate and coordinate collective forms of contestation." Naveena’s work suggests that rather than focusing on crafting explanations of algorithmic decisions, #AI could be used throughout the process to help ensure that people who are eligible for benefits correctly receive them: identifying individuals who may not apply on their own, helping prepare and contextualize information to make applications relevant and informative, navigating contestation strategies, and more. This work reminds me of a conversation with Joanna Bryson a few years back when I was looking for examples of how people go about contesting algorithmic decisions -- how do they process the decisions, how do they decide that the contestation is the way to go, how do they navigate the contestation processes? At the time, Joanna and some of her colleagues shared some examples of high profile contestations but I wanted to understand if we are designing processes such that contestation is an option by anyone other than superheroes.

The Executive Order issued by President Biden addresses several key aspects of AI, with a focus on bias and discrimination mitigation. The highlighted sections pertaining to bias and discrimination include: 1. Providing guidance to prevent AI algorithms from exacerbating discrimination in areas such as housing and federal benefits. 2. Addressing algorithmic discrimination through training, technical assistance, and coordination to investigate and prosecute civil rights violations related to AI. 3. Ensuring fairness in the criminal justice system by developing best practices on the use of AI in various processes, including sentencing and predictive policing. These provisions emphasize the significance of addressing bias and discrimination in #AI, promoting equity, and protecting individuals' rights in the rapidly evolving landscape of #artificialintelligence. #AI #BiasMitigation #DiscriminationPrevention #diversityequityinclusionandbelonging #diversityinclusion #dataanalytics

AI Voice Technology: Reshaping Political Communication A groundbreaking development has unfolded with AI technology being used to voice Imran Khan's speech from prison. This approach, converting written notes into a speech delivered by AI, signifies a pivotal moment in political communication. It demonstrates overcoming political restrictions, engaging particularly the youth via social media, and showing remarkable flexibility and strength. This 𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘭𝘺 𝘱𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 approach highlights AI's role in empowering the silenced and also raises important questions about its authenticity and possible misuse in the political arena. An interesting fusion of technological innovation with the principles of democracy. #AIInPolitics #aiforgovernment #DigitalInnovation #PoliticalStrategy #aiadvancements