Author Archives: Michael Froomkin

Official ‘We Robot 2012’ Press Release

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW ANNOUNCES ROBOT CONVENTION Gathering of robot designers, developers and policy wonks

CORAL GABLES, FL (March 14, 2012) — Robots are the next Internet. Eventually, they could be everywhere — in the air, on battlefields, in hospitals, even in your bed. Robots will help capture criminals, take care of the elderly and drive your car.

Like the Internet, their widespread use will bring social and economic transformations. But robots will pose dangers, because in one important way, robots are not like the Internet: They interact directly with the material world. They can and will hurt people — either accidentally or deliberately. “Think of a robot as an iPhone with a corkscrew and a chainsaw attached,” says Professor A. Michael Froomkin of the University of Miami School of Law, who has put together We Robot 2012, a unique conference that will attempt to get a jump on the issues posed by robot technology.

The conference will be held at the University of Miami School of Law, in Coral Gables, Florida, on April 21 and 22.

For all their promise, robots bring with them the potential for legal and policy headaches. If robots come to mimic people with great accuracy, will they change interpersonal relationships? Will the use of robots in law enforcement erode individual privacy and due process rights? Who is responsible when robots learn to harm someone, or to kill? Is it the manufacturer, the programmers, the owners, or perhaps the unwitting neighbor who might have provoked an unexpected response? Who shoulders the criminal responsibility when machines run amok? When is killing by robot a war crime?

The inaugural “We Robot” conference will tackle these issues. It will gather experts on the front lines of robot theory, design and development, as well as those who design or influence the legal and social structures in which robots operate. Guests will include Kate Darling, IP Research Specialist at MIT Media Lab and currently co-teaching “Robot Rights” at Harvard Law School; Dr. Ian Kerr, Canada Research Chair in Ethics, Law and Technology at the University of Ottawa Faculty of Law; and retired Brigadier General Richard M. O’Meara, who is a professor of International Law in the Division of Global and Homeland Security Affairs at Rutgers University.

“We want to start a conversation, both to help robot designers and policy-makers,” Froomkin says. “There are things that both robot designers and policymakers need to be thinking about, and the chance of getting it right is much greater if we get them to think about it together.”

Robots are entering the national agenda. President Barack Obama recently launched the National Robotics Initiative, a program designed to advance “next-generation robotics.” The focus is on robots that can work closely with humans — helping factory workers, healthcare providers, soldiers, surgeons and others.

That is why the time is right for a national conference to consider the social and policy issues that robots will create. “It’s still early enough to make changes,” says Froomkin, the Laurie Silvers and Mitchell Rubenstein Distinguished Professor of Law. “Some problems will be avoided by early design changes. Other problems may require a tweak in the law to encourage the deployment of helpful new technologies. But in some cases, we’re going to find that there’s just a real conflict between what robots might do and policies we value. Even in those cases, it’s better to start the conversation early.”

The conference is free and open to the public, but advance reservations are required because of limited space. For more information, go to http://robots.law.miami.edu.

# # # #

The University of Miami’s mission is to educate and nurture students, to create knowledge, and to provide service to our community and beyond. Committed to excellence and proud of the diversity of our University family, we strive to develop future leaders of our nation and the world. The University of Miami School of Law‘s mission is to foster the intellectual discipline, creativity, and critical skills that will prepare its graduates for the highest standards of professional competence in the practice of law in a global environment subject to continual — and not always predictable — transformation; to cultivate a broad range of legal and interdisciplinary scholarship that, working at the cutting edge of its field, enhances the development of law and legal doctrine, and deepens society’s understanding of law and its role in society; and to fulfill the legal profession’s historic duty to promote the interests of justice.

Posted in Robots, Talks & Conferences | 2 Comments

Such an Honor

An outfit calling itself “the world’s premier online directory of education” has sent me an email announcing that I am on their list of “the most influential Law professors on Twitter”.

(Twitter tells me I have more than 900 followers. Is that good?)

Posted in Discourse.net | Comments Off on Such an Honor

Elections Should Be About Important Things

If the 2012 election feels hollow, this might be why. Such a massive Constitutional redesign of our American order should be debated, and a Presidential race is the right forum in which to do so. But since that’s not happening, social conflict a few years down the road is probably the more likely path.

Matt Stoller at naked capitalism

He’s writing about all the terrible things we’re learning about banks robosigning foreclosure documents…learning it conveniently days after the government has (robo?)signed off on a whitewash deal for the perpetrators. Worst fact: it’s still happening.

The thing about that quote is that it could just as easily have been about civil liberties, such as the Obama-Holder view that they can terminate any US citizen with extreme prejudice without bothering to have the slightest judicial process. Of course right now the other side probably is unhappy they haven’t killed more citizens…

Posted in 2012 Election, Civil Liberties, Econ & Money: Mortgage Mess | 1 Comment

The App that Ate the Plastic Card

There’s a lot of smart stuff about why the mobile Starbucks phone app caught on and the Mondex digital cash card failed in Dave Birch’s latest at ‘Consult Hyperion’. If you are into e-payments, you should read it, but then if you are into e-payments you’ve probably been reading him for a long time.

All this is partly an excuse to repost this paragraph, that made me laugh:

Incidentally, I got an e-mail from Starbucks telling me that from now on if I use my Starbucks app to buy in-store then the staff can call me by my name. I had to go and log in to my Starbucks account to find out what name I’d used when I set it up. Naturally, I hadn’t used my “real name”, which in this case is pretty handy. When they call out “Latte with extra shot for Dave” there might be many Daves and so confusion, but when they call out “Latte with extra shot for Theogenes de Montford” I’m pretty sure I’ll be the only one up at the counter. But I digress.

I so get that. But somehow I never do it.

Posted in Cryptography, ID Cards and Identification | 2 Comments

US News Rankings Season Again

Is the “69th best law school” significantly better than the “77th best law school in America”? Eight places, sounds like something. How about compared to the “82nd best law school” in America? That’s a 13 place difference, surely it should mean something, shouldn’t it? But it’s not as good as the “60th best law school in America” is it?

But what if they are all the same school in different years? And what if the whole ranking system is, save for fairly large differences, pretty much a sham?

As I said a a few years ago:

fishSome years we get a lower score than the year before, and then I think I shouldn’t carp about the whole thing for fear of it looking like sour grapes. Some years we get a higher score than the year before, and then I carp.

The idea of ranking law schools is not ridiculous. The way US News does it is very ridiculous. The survey data relies on the opinions of people who in most cases may be very informed about a few law schools but as a class are not likely to be particularly well informed about many law schools — even though they may be judges, hiring partners, law Deans and professors. And increasingly the survey data is self-referential: people have heard school X has a high/low ranking, so it must be good/bad, right?

At its grossest level, there is no doubt US News captures something real: the top N schools (10? 14? 15? 20? 20+?) really are better than the middle N or lowest N. But are the middle N significantly better than the bottom N? Sometimes, yes, but only sometimes. Here the picture gets very cloudy — not least because “better” ought to be “better for whom”; once you get away from the most elite, best resourced (i.e. high endowment), most prestigious law schools, what is best depends on factors that are personal: urban/rural, North/South, East/Middle/West, large/small, best in town/best town and so on.

The US News systems are designed to churn. Changed numbers sells magazines. Having the numbers stay the same doesn’t. Yet it’s hard to believe many schools change very much from year to year. Yes, once a while a school suffers a crisis or an epiphany, but those are pretty rare events.

There are inbuilt biases in the US News scoring system that favor small schools, and schools in cities with high starting salaries. Not to mention that in South Florida the market has more medium-sized firms than in other cities our size, and those firms rarely make offers until a candidate has passed the bar, notably depressing the ’employment at graduation’ rate.

I sympathize with aspiring students who need a guide to the perplexed when sorting through their options. It’s such a shame that the information market’s first-mover advantage has allowed such a crummy measure to dominate.

Anyway, we went up eight places this year, continuing our record of high volatility that has seen numbers from 60-82 in a small number of years. I suppose the Dean and the alumni will be happy, and that’s always nice. Personally, I’d put UM somewhere in the 45-60 range, but I suppose I’m biased.

Update: Or maybe I’m not. TaxProf Blog notes that Miami’s peer rank (rank by how professors at other schools see it) is 51.

Posted in Law School, U.Miami | 4 Comments

Why Can’t They Just Get Along?

Assume that Mitt Romney is going to be the GOP nominee eventually. It’s clear that a slice of the base would rather have Rick Santorum and that they are not going to give up easily. Thus, any friend of the party must be concerned that the ongoing battle will just bleed Romney’s campaign of funds, and provide soundbites for Obama to use against him in the general election.

Isn’t it time, therefore, that all friends of the Republican Party urged Mitt Romney to promise to make Santorum his vice presidential nominee in exchange for his support, and thus unify the party before the internecine fighting becomes too much?

Or, they could just let the food fight escalate and provide free entertainment for Democrats.

Posted in 2012 Election | 1 Comment