Orin Kerr

@OrinKerr

Professor, Stanford Law School. Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution. Read my book: amazon.com/Digital-Fourth…

Stanford, California

OrinKerr.com

Replies Reposts Media Articles

Pinned
Orin Kerr
@OrinKerr
Aug 5
NEW: Here, finally, is my new draft article on the Supreme Court's Chatrie decision. I think the ruling is tremendously important to Fourth Amendment law—and here's why. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
Orin Kerr
@OrinKerr
1h
This is a good question about AI scholarship. My tentative take is that it depends on what kind of implications/tensions AI is drawing out. Some are appropriate for AI, but others aren't. Thread. 🧵
Chris Elmendorf
@CSElmendorf
2h
Replying to @OrinKerr and @zach_pohlman
Yes it’s a cultural practice, but an AI drawing out implications of or tensions within that practice may contribute us much to understanding of it as a human doing the same, yes?
Orin Kerr
@OrinKerr
4h
Below, @zach_pohlman asks what makes AI-written legal scholarship problematic, if anything. In my view, the explanation goes to what makes law so fundamentally different from engineering: It's human-made. Law is a cultural practice, not a science. 🧵 x.com/zach_pohlman/s…
Zachary B. Pohlman
@zach_pohlman
8h
Genuine question. Why are AI-written law review articles objectionable? Say the author inputs the idea, research, detailed outline, etc., but AI drafts it. Now say the author drafts the same article the old-fashioned way. Why should we prefer (b) over (a)?
Orin Kerr
@OrinKerr
5h
If you tell AI to write in a style designed to beat Pangram—designed to get a 100% human written score—can Pangram still tell it's AI-written? Just tried this. Pangram said it was 100% AI-written. Here's was my request, to Claude Opus 5.
Orin Kerr
@OrinKerr
17h
I tried two more tests of Pangram's AI detection software. My overall take: I'm impressed. First, I wondered, what does Pangram do if you feed it human written text just *edited* by AI? When I tried it, Pangram spotted that some was human and some was AI. 🧵