April 28, 2026
A.I. is getting way out ahead of the old time-y problem of wanting cameras in the Supreme Court.
It's almost better this way (unless you want to watch the reactions on the faces of those who are not speaking):
AND: Lots more video like that at the YouTube page of On the Docket — "Using AI-generated visuals and the justices’ official recorded opinions, we present videos of the justices delivering their opinions, making these pivotal moments more engaging to a broader audience."
Posts
25 comments:
Super cool
Any time delay?
So now AI is interpreting body language from speech. This makes it worse.
Interesting. Mannerisms that are reasonably believable within the context of human behavior, but not at all warranted to be representative of the actual human, so all those nuances could be used to paint a false picture - show anger or humor, etc.
A.I. is 'way ahead', as in 'over their skis'. Can they program a justice to have Tourette's?
I’d like to see an AI version of the recent Zeldin/DeLauro dust-up based on the speech only to see how well it interprets the anger there. Hoo-boy - it would need to use Warner Brothers cartoon effects to show her eyes bugging out of her head!
Actually seeing a video of Ketanji Brown Jackson saying the absolutely retarded shit she says would be hilarious.
It would also start waking up the entire country that there are so many people voting who should have nothing to do with deciding where this country goes.
Ketanji Brown Jackson is example A of people who should not be voting.
Ketanji Brown Jackson is example A of people who should not be voting.
I look forward to the day when Achilles gets to decide who votes and who doesn't. He also wants to choose who lives and dies.
Achilles - just curious. Who decides who can and cannot vote? seems like a pretty big undertaking
Who CAN vote? U.S. citizens. Who SHOULD vote? U.S. citizens who have a reasonable understanding of the candidates and policies they represent. Who SHOULDN'T vote? Everyone else.
Modulation schemes.
Still obviously fake. They not using the real AGI AI.
There is no artificial general intelligence, only aping intelligence through heuristic schemes.
"So now AI is interpreting body language from speech."
Yeah, and AI knows when they are reading and shows them looking down at papers and occasionally glancing up.
Which justices are forming questions in their head and which are just reading from papers? AI knows! I know too but it's vivid to see it.
Actually, pretty cool.
Still evokes the uncanny valley. That'll be a Butlerian jihad from me, dawg.
I struggle mightily trusting what AI puts out. The product can and will be manipulated.
AI should do the Marbury v Madison oral argument
The point of no cameras is preventing playing to the camera. AI doesn't cause that.
Facing the camera YouTube talks have gone almost 100% AI. They get the body motions wrong, out of sync with the speech.
Great opportunity to falsely and maliciously represent the Justices and their opinions.
Cameras in the courtroom? Judge Ito became a star!
I want to see it done Aardman Animation “Creature Comforts “ style, with a different animal for each Justice. Taciturn Thomas could be a wombat, dormouse or sloth. ACB would of course be a rabbit with kits climbing all over her. The three woke ladies could be meerkats popping up and down. Etc. CC, JSM
God forbid people read.
I want the ai to do it by animating the old artist sketches they used to draw in court. It would be like the a ha Take on Me video with tightly edited motion and breaking glass. Perhaps a motor cycle.
I predict that the common law tort of false light invasion of privacy will evolve, and that statutes will be enacted, to prohibit the use of AI to misrepresent an individual's beliefs or actions. The misrepresentation will not need to reach the level of outrageousness.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.