A superintelligent lawyer could make courts unfair for one person, but fairer for everyone
rohanpaul_ai · x · 2026-07-29
The post itself is just an eye emoji at @finkd, but the attached image contains a quote about a thought experiment involving a superintelligent lawyer.
It argues that if only one person had such a lawyer, courts would become unfair even if that person were wrong on the merits. If everyone had access, justice could become more fair and efficient because empowered people would check large institutions. The image also mentions a book scanner that can digitize fragile books without destroying them.
More from AGI Musings
- Frontier post-training is a humanities problem as much as a technical one — brianryhuang · 2026-07-29
- AI is now propping up GDP, productivity, and even job growth, poster says — Dan_Jeffries1 · 2026-07-29
- Paper argues AI’s productivity paradox needs an attention reinvestment cycle — lawrennd · 2026-07-29
- AI safety debate splits over whether stigma helps or harms epistemics — evilsocket · 2026-07-29
- Why assume AGI will be a goal-maximizing system at all? — Jason_T_Jungreis · 2026-07-29
- AI is now too complex to understand, says the author, who is backing open source — karmicoder · 2026-07-29