will AI obliterate the rule of law?
https://matthewbutterick.com/chron/will-ai-obliterate-the-rule-of-law.html
the core objecÂtion is that so far, many generÂaÂtive AI prodÂucts are based on massive violaÂtions of law. If generÂaÂtive AI compaÂnies want to compete against human artists by legal means—they’re welcome to do so. But in many cases, that’s not what they’ve chosen. As a profesÂsional artist, I’m not opposed to advanceÂments in techÂnology; I’m opposed to violaÂtions of the law.
...machines often have “free rein” legally. This axiom made sense when a machine was primarily underÂstood as a tool wielded by a human. This distincÂtion has gotten murkier, however, as machines have moved into roles tradiÂtionÂally reserved to human judgÂment.
...by deleÂgating reading to a legally imperÂvious machine—the “literate robot”—human actors avoid the usual legal scrutiny that would apply to their actions. In so doing, copyÂright law is essenÂtially neutralÂized. He foreÂsees this remaining a tremenÂdous incenÂtive for humans to “outsource” reading to machines that are not treated as legally culpable agents. Even to the point of anniÂhiÂlating human reading altoÂgether.
...If AI compaÂnies are allowed to market AI systems that are essenÂtially black boxes, they could become the ultiÂmate ends-justify-the-means devices. Before too long, we will not deleÂgate deciÂsions to AI systems because they perform better. Rather, we will deleÂgate deciÂsions to AI systems because they can get away with everyÂthing that we can’t. You’ve heard of money launÂdering? This is human-behavior launÂdering. At last—plauÂsible deniÂaÂbility for everyÂthing.