On Lawfare Brittan Heller discusses the use of AI and metaverse avatars in court proceedings, and I can’t help but wonder as to the accuracy of this statement:<\/p>\n
Humans make judgments based on impressions of others\u2019 expressions and movements. Mouths and eyes are particularly important for interpreting if someone is trustworthy or is a threat. In avatars, the face is the last step in crossing the uncanny valley<\/a>. This is why some virtual humans or digital resurrections of actors, like Carrie Fisher\u2019s posthumous Princess Leia, still feel \u201coff,\u201d flat, or just creepy, in an almost imperceptible way.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
My experience with the use of Carrie Fisher’s image in the Star Wars movies made since her death is inevitably colored by my knowledge that she’s passed away. Has anyone carried out a double blind study of the uncanny valley testing the latest technology?<\/p>\n
On the topic of AI assistance in generating opinions, it strikes me that a ChatGPT system trained on a law library and resultant opinions may be a perfect assistant to the judge. As a judge themselves, however, well, I’d rather not stand in that courtroom, not even as a juror.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
On Lawfare Brittan Heller discusses the use of AI and metaverse avatars in court proceedings, and I can’t help but wonder as to the accuracy of this statement: Humans make judgments based on impressions of others\u2019 expressions and movements. Mouths and eyes are particularly important for interpreting if someone is \u2026 Continue reading