Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Aristides's avatar

I think it is significantly more likely that it would be considered a violation of the 6th Amendment to use them as a substitute for a jury. Originalist thoughts will disagree with it simply because it is new and goes against the history of trial by jury, and liberal Justices will be skeptical for the biased reasons you mentioned. I do suspect the algorithm will be admitted as evidence at one point, but even that will require the supreme court to either overrule or make a large carve out from People v. Collins. There is still a large chance that algorithms will be treated the same as the evidence of statistical improbability in that case, and be completely banned.

Edit: People v. Collins was a California supreme court decision, so technically it only applies in California, but most states treat it similarly.

Expand full comment
Maxim Lott's avatar

Good post!

All pretty plausible. Though I think in this world, gains would indeed be driven by IQ and AI.

Also I want an apology from Fukuyama. “End of history” lol.

Expand full comment
4 more comments...

No posts