Re: Problems with Juries [was: A modest proposal]

From: John Clark (
Date: Sun Feb 06 2000 - 14:50:46 MST

Robert J. Bradbury <> On February 06, 2000 Wrote:

>Just copy "uploaded" minds selected for Jury duty. Have the trial.
>When situations arise where things need to be "ignored", you just do
>a "rollback" [...] the problem is that normal humans don't have a
>delete key. We can fix that.

I'm dubious of the conventional wisdom that ignorance is the key to
 justice, but your suggestion has other problems. Maybe it's just me but if
I was one of those uploads I would object strenuously to having part of my
memory erased, so strenuously that I would be willing to kill in order to ovoid
jury duty. And it would lead to a population explosion of uploads too, when
the trial is over I'll be damned if I'll let you turn me off.

>Now, of course one gets into the question of what would make an
>"ideal" eJury.

The best jury is no jury and no judge either, better to have an arbitrator.
If the arbitrator receives no salary but is paid by the case, and if he's
picked by both sides then it's in his financial interest to be as just as
possible. If he favored one side over another, or made brutal or stupid
decisions he would not be picked again and would need to look for a
new line of work. Unlike present day judges and juries, justice would
have a net positive survival value for the arbitrator. Justice is no different
than anything else, if you want to maximize something make it a
commodity and sell it on the open market.

    John K Clark

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:03:30 MDT