OpSec It is a VERY interesting proposal, but it generates a doubt for me.
This is a robot lawyer, and what lawyers do is protect their clients from the legislative situations that apply to them under the use and protection of the law, so, my doubt is obvious: What legislation does this robot use to protect its clients? Obviously the laws in the US are not the same as those in France, Spain, Switzerland...
And another doubt. It is true that on several occasions some companies and companies jump or attack their customers through unlawful acts, but I believe that there is a smaller but stronger group in terms of power than any company and that commits many more unlawful acts against citizens: The government. This robot protects you in some way against unlawful acts committed by the government against you, or in that case the robot is blinded?
An example: a Chinese customer could use this robot to protect himself from those unlawful (and sometimes tyrannical) acts committed by his government against him?
I think the obvious answer in this case is no, but I raise this question because many times we give a lot of noise to some unjust and ignore the existence of others unjust.
To give an example, a week and a half ago here in Spain the "Pegasus Case" was discovered, a case that consisted of the central government making use of spyware against some politicians and pro-independence citizens of a region of the country. Some of these politicians had files and court orders that legally "justified" such follow-up (by an act of rebellion, trying to unilaterally independent that region out of thin air, without following the procedures or having the recognition of the central government) but many other citizens spied on were not covered by this justification, they did not have any file and there is no court order that justified it.
What do I want to get to? The proposal is, without a doubt, interesting, but I think it could only develop its true potential if it were used under a certain government and certain legislation: Under a government with very low corruption rates (that is, that they did not break the laws, that they did not abuse their position of power, that they were transparent...), which is obviously not common at all, only some governments of Nordic European countries or countries such as Switzerland, Singapore or New Zealand comply with that premise; and legislation that respects individuals, and that (above all) offers and enforces effective mechanisms to their citizens to protect themselves from illegalities that affect them, wherever they come from (whether from a company like Microsoft, or from the government of the day... premise that again is only maximum, although in the same way partially fulfilled by the same countries that I mentioned earlier (less Singapore)).. I hope I have made myself understood. Greetings.
