NewsNovo
The question of whether artificial intelligence can replace human judges is under formal examination.
The fact that it has reached this stage matters: formal scrutiny means the question is live enough to require an answer, and the answer is not straightforward.
The case for AI adjudication rests on consistency and processing capacity. A system that applies rules without fatigue, the argument goes, removes one class of variance from the courtroom.
The examination is testing whether that is enough. The counterargument is the harder one to dismiss. Legal judgment is not rule application.
Keep reading