Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
From The Myth Of Babel To Google Translate: Confronting Malicious Use Of Artificial Intelligence—Copyright And Algorithmic Biases In Online Translation Systems, Shlomit Yanisky-Ravid, Cynthia Martens
From The Myth Of Babel To Google Translate: Confronting Malicious Use Of Artificial Intelligence—Copyright And Algorithmic Biases In Online Translation Systems, Shlomit Yanisky-Ravid, Cynthia Martens
Seattle University Law Review
Many of us rely on Google Translate and other Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning (AI) online translation daily for personal or commercial use. These AI systems have become ubiquitous and are poised to revolutionize human communication across the globe. Promising increased fluency across cultures by breaking down linguistic barriers and promoting cross-cultural relationships in a way that many civilizations have historically sought and struggled to achieve, AI translation affords users the means to turn any text—from phrases to books—into cognizable expression. This Article discusses the burgeoning possibilities in the 3A Era (Advanced, Autonomous, AI systems) of AI online translation as …
Non-Autonomous Artificial Intelligence Programs And Products Liability: How New Ai Products Challenge Existing Liability Models And Pose New Financial Burdens, Greg Swanson
Seattle University Law Review
This Comment argues that the unique relationship between manufacturers, consumers, and their reinforcement learning AI systems challenges existing products liability law models. These traditional models inform how to identify and apportion liability between manufacturers and consumers while exposing litigants to low-dollar tort remedies with inherently high-dollar litigation costs.11 Rather than waiting for AI autonomy, the political and legal communities should be proactive and generate a liability model that recognizes how new AI programs have already redefined the relationship between manufacturer, consumer, and product while challenging the legal and financial burden of prospective consumer-plaintiffs and manufacturer-defendants.
Artificial Intellegence And Policing: First Questions, Elizabeth E. Joh
Artificial Intellegence And Policing: First Questions, Elizabeth E. Joh
Seattle University Law Review
Artificial intelligence is playing an increasingly larger role in all sectors of society, including policing. Many police departments are already using artificial intelligence (AI) to help predict and identify suspicious persons and places.1 Increased computational power and oceans of data have given rise to inferences about violence and threats.2 AI will change policing just as it will healthcare, insurance, commerce, and transportation. But what questions should we ask about AI and policing?
Ethical Machines?, Ariela Tubert
Ethical Machines?, Ariela Tubert
Seattle University Law Review
This Article explores the possibility of having ethical artificial intelligence. It argues that we face a dilemma in trying to develop artificial intelligence that is ethical: either we have to be able to codify ethics as a set of rules or we have to value a machine’s ability to make ethical mistakes so that it can learn ethics like children do. Neither path seems very promising, though perhaps by thinking about the difficulties with each we may come to a better understanding of artificial intelligence and ourselves.
Introduction, Annette Clark
Introduction, Annette Clark
Seattle University Law Review
Introductory remarks given by Dean Annette Clark at the 2018 Seattle University School of Law symposium “Singularity: AI and the Law.”
Robotic Speakers And Human Listeners, Helen Norton
Robotic Speakers And Human Listeners, Helen Norton
Seattle University Law Review
This article discusses protected First Amendment speech and how this protection should be applied to robotic speech. Robotic speech is that created by automated means, currently “bots” but the producers of automated speech are evolving. The article further differentiates between rights of the producers of this speech and listeners or consumers of the speech, and the impact of First Amendment protections on each group.