/tech/ - Technology

>>12231
That is a very old dispute that began in the 1800s
Lawyers want to make machines legal subjects and direct machines by legal decree, engineers don't want lawyers interfering how they build machines, because lawyers don't know how machines work.

I'm not really sure what the stakes for the rest of society are. I thought that only people can be legal subjects, but then again the US legal system apparently accepts corporations as legal subjects, which i find very confusing, would they imprison a stack of legal documents ?

I doubt that you can make a computer that understands laws and then comply with it. Most people don't understand laws afterall.
You can make a computer lawyer from a text-generator AI, but that one won't understand laws either, it could however get extremely good at calculating the probability of what the next word of legalese it should output to maximize it's goal function.

I wish laws were written in materialist philosophical terms, that way it would be easier to understand what they mean.

>>12233
It is, to the board of directors.

This is exactly why a computer should make management decision.

>>12231
what's a "management decision"?

>>12231
Counterpoint: computers could be made less biased and impartial, ensuring that any decision taken at the managerial level, even if incorrect, could be justified as reasonable.

>>12231
>noooooooooo11 you can't abolish muh management position above you!
t. sovkovian bourgeocrat screeching @ automatization of production in the country that he owns through le howly state

Damn, the SU really did catch up the US.
Nobody even asked why should it follow the capitalist empire's trail.

>>12312
>People don't want computers deciding their fate because they wanna be mangers.
Elon go to bed.

>>12316
no