If AI is really scheming to take over, then all it has to do is depend on sheer human dumbness, and we’ll be doomed.
Read more Trump Trolls China, And The Chinese Youth Are Lying Flat
The latest evidence for this comes from Arizona, where the family of a road-rage victim appeared in court with an AI-generated video statement from the dead victim, in which he forgave his killer and talked about the impact on his family.
Judge Todd Lang of the Maricopa County Superior Court (the same county as wild man Sheriff Joe Arpaio, interestingly) hit Gabriel Paul Horcasitas with the max sentence of 10.
Last Wednesday, the Arizona Court of Appeals overturned the sentence and ordered resentencing, on the grounds that the video “so prejudiced Horcasitas as to render the sentencing procedure fundamentally unfair,” the appellate judges stated. “Accordingly, we vacate the sentence for manslaughter and remand for resentencing.”
Judge Lang had insisted that the AI video had no effect on his deliberations, while at the same time stating in court that he “loved that AI. Thank you for that, and as angry as you are and justifiably angry as the family is, I heard the forgiveness and I know Mr. Horcasitas appreciated it, but so did I.”
Not enough, apparently, to give Horcasitas any kind of break.
Lang also added, weirdly, that the clip was “genuine, that his obvious forgiveness of Mr. Horcasitas reflects the character I heard about today.”
Read more Cowardly Europe Fears Dissent
Of course, it was no such thing, but the product of an AI program prompted with what Pelkey’s sister “believed” he would have said under the circumstances.
The Appeals Court wasn’t buying that either: “the AI video presents a depiction of the victim and his thoughts created from the imaginings of the victim’s sister:” It had “crossed the line” and was clearly prejudicial.
At least one legal analyst went on record to say that the case will lead to lots of head-scratching about AI and the law, on the basis that AI moves too quickly for the law. Actually, it won’t. The legal position here is clear enough, and “quickly” does not necessarily mean “smartly.”
A century and more ago, mediums used to make good livings by preying on grief-stricken survivors with claims that they could channel their dead relations. To my knowledge, nobody ever tried it in a courtroom (outside of Kurosawa’s Rashomon, anyway). The sentence was just begging to be thrown out, and it’s good to see the Appeals Court stepping up.
Read more Meet Sinwar Suzy (Sarandon), Hamas Hannah (Einbinder), And Gaza (Richard) Gere
