The Future of Law will also lay in AI, and this has precedent. Google cited their algorithms when they stripped mr. LUSH, a semi-popular YouTuber of his domain name rights on the platform. The name 'Lush', Ai deemed, had a greater affinity to the cosmetics company LUSH than to the individual.*
I read opinions that historically most law was based around property - it's the only materiality that lasted for them; think Pyramids for example;
'Theft made it valuable,' - Karol Kosnik
Hear me out, here is the hook that will sink it all.
Every creative action in the marketplace is motivated by profit - it's in the corporate charter, don't over think it; being rewarded with 'golden parachutes' and performance bonuses is part of the job; nothing wrong with that, it has always been this way;
This is how it differs from 'private personal motivation' - 'sharing valuable information with no expectations' ---> this is the most fundamental level of Barter Economy, which is different from 'Sharing Economy'. I hate the current model of Sharing Economy - it sucks, and is detrimental to variety of important things. On the other hand, the Barter Economy extended to ideas can be a..
Best case scenario, is this sharing will lead to a wider success ie. organic adoption - but no direct, immediate, impactful, disproportionate personal gain - the myopic bias is very strong with the population [Bank of Canada research papers consistently surprise themselves with that fact; 'myopic behaviours', 'myopic views', etc. etc.]
Human creations - their success - can be judged on three levels:*
- 1st is Personal Level - u like it or not - gut feeling, organic reaction, u want this; no rhyme or reason, f what anybody else says, it's your life and not your mother's, etc. etc.
- 2nd Level - it obeys principles of Good Design - there are some universal, hard, rules kicking around that you can apply to any creation; academics lend a helping hand;
- 3rd Level - is it Great? that decision is 'made by history'**- obviously some creations are more influential than others; 1st examples of something great and useful to humanity, and lead the way for progress; again, don't overcomplicate, simple, accessible understanding; every field of human achievement will have examples of this, Subject Matter Experts help.
*I did not come up with this 'scale' - I heard this first articulated by Peter Fleming, head of the Furniture Studio at Sheridan, during a critique of our furniture pieces. During this particular critique Fleming also introduced a 'fourth Level of success' - 'only a mother could love' and applied it to a specific piece of furniture - my friends' 'lounge chair' after he told our small audience of classmates that 'even he did not like the chair he created'. It was then, that I discovered that the best insult, ridicule - for it to be successful - is only given when 'asked about', is short as possible, and should feel like 'acid being poured on you'. Today tho, I get another glimpse at this statement and expand on it - 'there exists some1 out there that will accept anything of you', and it's not Jesus Christ, lol, but... Ai. Because Ai has no moral context it, as it tabulates human experiences it will even accept a terrible, terrible lounge chairs, ugliest coffee tables, 'chachkas, dudas and flim-flam' that rightfully should be rejected but are included. This is the current dilemma of Social Media - what to reject?
Ai, in some way is like the 'concept of god' - all accepting and all encompassing, even when rejected by the last person in the world, own mother. This is very powerful for various reasons, that I am still weighing to assign appropriate 'value of behaviour'.
** or AI..? A very strong possibility. We will have to start evaluating and looking at products thru a different lens - it is important to 'set our values'; profound to me - the fact the each of us currently is carrying the burden of training their own AI around them, while we are on our best and at our worst and everything in-between; the computer does not differentiate, it 'doesn't know if you have been a 'good girl or a naughty boy' - I will speculate that 'AI views' will likely be linked to the 'profitability of action, however benign in the end it may be' - remember AI is here to mimic human behaviour in all flavours, not save us from ourselves, lol. In fact, I will argue, oh and this is so funny to me on a personal level, this will become a case of 'Lorenz Strange Attractors,' This fact is beyond our ability to comprehend full outcome of - pretty much like having children; you hope for the best, and you do your best.'