Earlier this month, researchers unveiled an AI computer that could predict the results of Supreme Court trials better than a human. While its designers were hopeful that the device could soon be used in the courtroom, an expert has warned that using AI to sentence criminals is a'dangerous idea.' In an article for The Conversation, Mr Christopher Markou, a PhD candidate in the Faculty of Law at the University of Cambridge explains why he think we should boycott AI judges. Earlier this month, researchers unveiled an AI computer that could predict the results of Supreme Court trials better than a human. While its designers were hopeful that the device could soon be used in the courtroom, an expert has warned that using AI to sentence criminals is a'dangerous idea' Earlier this month, researchers from the Illinois Institute of Technology in Chicago, and South Texas College of Law created an algorithm based on a neural network, which tries to simulate the way the brain works in order to learn. The algorithm analysed the US Supreme Court Database, which holds data on court cases dating back to 1791.

What happens when criminals figure out how to use robots to commit crimes? Christopher Markou, a Ph.D. candidate and Faculty of Law at the University of Cambridge, takes a look at the disturbing possibility in We could soon face a robot crimewave ... the law needs to be ready, a commentary he wrote for The Conversation. "How do we make sense of all this?" asks Markou. Should we shrug our shoulders as a society and get back to Netflix? Should we start making plans for how we deal with all of this?