Hacker News Reader

Comment by mikeortman | Hacker News Reader

"We include an extensive legal and ethical discussion to address the potentially sensitive nature of this material. As a consequence, the corpus will only be released for research purposes under certain restrictions."

So no, you will never see this unless you are a researcher. Academic gatekeeper strikes again

View on HN

Its amazing how one-sided the public nature of prosecutions are in the sense that they are entitled to everything that is advantageous to the government/harmful to the defendant in the name of the public but they can't quite extend that to ensuring the public has the necesary tools to understand, interpret and successfully operate within the domain of, and sometimes (God forbid) "against" (in an adversarial, not contravening sense) the law itself by playing within its rules to their own benefit or advantage as they should arguably be fully entitled and empowered to.

Assuming its consistent with fundamental justice and precedant (which shouldn't really necessarily require an advanced legal education to competently analyse and resynthesize into a case that integrates the facts of the case in question), we should value the abillity of the citizenry and all litigants in general to quickly and easily present an informed meritorious case and not rely on obfuscation or access issues rooted in technology and deficiencies of any given education system to limit participants' capabillities unduly.

Maybe it's for the best.

Once you feed an LLM all case law, answers to questions like "...so how can I kill my family, collect life insurance on them and get away with it" become trivial for the plebes to access.

As cool as tech advances are, you really don't want everyone unlocking the secrets of estate law or nuclear fusion. Some gatekeeping is necessary.

I suspect the LLM answer would be "There is no loophole that would allow you to kill your family for the life insurance money, but if you're crafty enough, never tell a soul, and keep the secret to your grave, then there's a half chance the case goes cold until your old age, wherein your fifth cousin once removed takes a DNA test that incriminates you, which is good enough."

Sometimes unlocking the secrets of something isn't enough - you need the underlying capital or power to actually pull it off. Normal individuals with normal incomes can't build reliably fusion reactors or pull off insurance fraud schemes no matter how much compute or intelligence they have. If they could, we wouldn't be living in a statist society, we'd be living in 2b2t.

Case law isn't going to have people who away with it, there's a selection bias there.

* who got away with it…

Mostly this is correct but it happens. There are always outliers and edge cases and its good for the system to have them so that they can be mitigated by iteratively improving the laws based on how they "won" and "got away with it". The noose is always tightening.

You really think a lawyer could answer that? There isnt any secret sauce to how to murder people legally in the case law.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com