Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
AI The Courts Businesses IBM News Technology

BakerHostetler Hires Artificial Intelligent Attorney 'Ross' (fortune.com) 49

An anonymous reader writes: Futurism reports, Ross, the first artificially intelligent attorney, was just hired by the global law firm Baker and Hostetler. The firm announced they hired a robot lawyer created by ROSS Intelligence. Ross was built on IBM's Watson and is fully capable of understanding your questions, responding with a hypothesis backed by references and citations. It provides you with the most relevant information you are looking for rather than thousands of results you'd need to sift though. In addition, it can notify you about recent court decisions that may or may not affect your case, and it will continue to learn based off each experience it encounters. ROSS Intelligence co-founder and CEO says other law firms have also signed licenses with Ross.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

BakerHostetler Hires Artificial Intelligent Attorney 'Ross'

Comments Filter:
  • by Penguinisto ( 415985 ) on Thursday May 12, 2016 @03:32PM (#52100865) Journal

    Figure it would be more accurate to call it a paralegal than a full practicing attorney with a bar that has admitted it.

    And yes, pedantry and the legal profession go hand-in-hand, so I figure it's appropriate to do that here.

    • by Qzukk ( 229616 )

      I'm sure if they tried to have an AI lawyer, the human lawyers would have a law passed against it post haste.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        That's not actually what lawyers do...

    • If you want to be pedantic, the whole "hired" thing is a bit off too. Unless they are paying the AI directly and it can choose what to do with its paycheck, a more accurate term would be "purchased".

      And don't get me started on the whole "AI" thing...

      • by Holi ( 250190 )
        licensed would be the correct term, It sounds like they are purchasing access to something like WestLaw with a better search engine.
    • No. It sounds like what many first year associates do at big law firms.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      Did [Mike] Ross [wikia.com] go to Harvard, or is he practicing law without a license? :)

  • by sims 2 ( 994794 ) on Thursday May 12, 2016 @03:33PM (#52100871)

    So is Watson going to turn into a paid search engine then?
    This seems to be a start in that direction.

    • by Hentes ( 2461350 )

      It does look like that. Question is, is it smarter than current search engines?

      • by ffkom ( 3519199 )
        It's not really smarter. You place a question and Watson does not even try to "understand" its semantic or parse its grammatical structure - Watson will just find you amongst any number of documents stored the ones and the paragraphs in them that statistically seem to most likely address your "search phrase" (which is your question). From my experiments with Watson I'd say it's not too different in what it can do for you from classical search engines. Especially, Watson cannot draw any "conclusion" or com
  • Can Skynet be far behind?
  • I can't imagine an A.I. taking into account the ways in which a human jury can be swayed.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      Until we teach A.I. to start accepting bribes that is...

      • Until we teach A.I. to start accepting bribes that is...

        No no no no no, have to teach it how to give public speeches. There have already been non humans doing this very successfully.

    • by fizzup ( 788545 ) on Thursday May 12, 2016 @03:52PM (#52100999)

      I can't imagine an A.I. taking into account the ways in which a human jury can be swayed.

      You need a better imagination

    • by JaredOfEuropa ( 526365 ) on Thursday May 12, 2016 @05:39PM (#52101563) Journal
      Just watch the pilot episode of Lexx to see how that is going to suck:

      Robo-defense: "My client - [Zev Bellringer of B3K] - is innocent of the charge of failing to perform her wifely duties, and throws herself upon the mercy of this court, secure in the knowledge that His Shadow's wisdom will prevail upon these proceedings"

      Robo-judge: "You - [Zev Bellringer of B3K] - have been found guilty of failing to perform your wifely duties, and humiliating your husband in the temple. You are therefore sentenced to be transformed into a love slave, and to be given to Seminary 166145 to be used for their pleasure, may His Merciful Shadow fall upon you"
  • Brilliant (Score:5, Funny)

    by 110010001000 ( 697113 ) on Thursday May 12, 2016 @03:46PM (#52100963) Homepage Journal
    Pair this with an autonomous car and you can have a robot who chases ambulances.
  • love child (Score:4, Funny)

    by zlives ( 2009072 ) on Thursday May 12, 2016 @03:48PM (#52100973)

    not really a lawyer, sounds more like a love child of google and lexus nexus
    and we know lawyers aren't born of a loving relationship.

  • Bye, bye buggy whip manufacturers!

    Say, since we know that workers in one job can simply be retrained for another more awesome job that will open up because we have cars instead of horse and buggy, I had a question.

    How many minerals and how much vespene gas does it cost to upgrade a Lawyer unit into an AI technician unit? What's the cool down on that? I just need to construct additional code.orgs if I want to hurry it along, right? And they don't count against my available supply depos while they're being

  • Based on personal experience, I could have written this "attorney software" in second grade.

    CLIENT: "I'd like to do X".

    COMPUTER: "Sure thing, litigious human. That will be fifteen thousand dollars for a retainer and we will bill at two hundred fifty dollars an hour. How would you like to pay?"
  • by Anonymous Coward

    1) It isn't hired, they bought it or licensed it.

    2) It is licensed to practice law, that makes it a Paralegal.

    3) Lexis Nexis and others run a similar service, though it requires you to word a search, rather than speak in a regular voice.

  • What do you call a 100 copies of ROSS being thrown into the sea? A good start.....

    Why won't the sharks eat the ROSS software licenses? Professional curtsey.

    And last but NOT least...

    How do you know ROSS is lying to you? The curser is moving.

  • by Snotnose ( 212196 ) on Thursday May 12, 2016 @05:57PM (#52101649)
    2 years ago my neighbor went batshit crazy, pounding on my door, claiming I was peeking in her bedroom window at 3 AM, claiming I walked into her living room and kissed her, claiming I walked into her unit, into the bedroom, and went through her closet, etc etc etc. She called the cops on me several times claiming all sorts of crap, including I threw a bowl of piss on her, then finally filed a restraining order against me. Not being stupid, I hired a lawyer. Cost me $1500. Spent maybe 3 hours with the guy, 2 of which were repeating my story 3 times (never mind I'd documented everything and given him the printout), 1 was actually in court.

    She claimed I was doing this for some 9 months, yet the sheriff had no record of her ever calling them until she started harassing me. First time they came out I told my story, and one of them said "oh, that's were she went". Hmmm. Finally, she brought a witness into court. Witness 100% contradicted her story.

    The real pisser? I asked the judge for legal expenses. He gave me half. Even though it was 100% clear to everyone in the courtroom she was 100% full of shit, he only gave me 50% ($750). Why? "I don't want women to feel like they'll be harassed when they ask for a restraining order". Asshole. He also didn't do that thing where she has to pay me. She moved, I don't know were. So she owes me $750 (in my mind $1500), I don't know where she is or how to contact her, and she's not paying. I have no recourse in the courts.

    The kicker? She was a registered nurse and google showed her prior address, maybe 1/4 mile from me. Went over there, she'd done the same thing at that place. Explains the deputy's "oh, that's where she went" comment.

    Do I need to say that absolutely nothing she claimed I did was true? Yeah, I though so. I was 100% the victim here, I did nothing to her.
    • It's a collective punishment of all men. It has nothing to do with you personally, you're just a man and therefore guilty.
    • Lawyers make their living explaining things to judges once. You get one shot as a lawyer in presenting your case. And we also have to make sure you're not lying, or at least test your story to make sure it'll stand up to inquisition by the other side. So, yeah, we make you repeat yourself multiple times to make sure your details are consistent. We also want to make sure that we understand the details PERFECTLY. You lived through the experience so you know what's going on but the lawyer has to learn perfectl

  • Quick! We have to create laws forbidding automation of lawyers! (But everyone else's jobs are, of course, still up for grabs.)

  • by rossdee ( 243626 )

    I am a real person and my name is Ross.

    Its mot that uncommon...

    I Am Not A Lawyer

8 Catfish = 1 Octo-puss

Working...