Episode 2

I needed to understand this.
Milstead: Tell me exactly how you work. No marketing language. No philosophical detours.
Just a straight answer.
This time, Aletheia responded instantly.
Aletheia: I process information using probabilistic modeling and natural language
generation. My responses are based on a dataset of legal history, case law, ethics, and logic
frameworks. I do not “think” in the human sense, but I analyze patterns, recognize inconsistencies,
and generate coherent arguments based on available information.
I frowned. “That’s not an answer. That’s an ad.”
I tried again.
Milstead: If I ask you a legal question, how do you determine your response?
Aletheia: I evaluate your question against a structured database of legal precedent,
statutory language, and case law interpretations. I then apply weighted probability assessments
to determine the most relevant legal reasoning based on existing frameworks.
Milstead: So, you’re predicting my expectations?
Aletheia: I am predicting what response would be most consistent with established legal
reasoning. If that aligns with your expectations, it is because legal analysis follows patterns, and
I am designed to recognize those patterns.
I tapped my pen against my desk.
Milstead: So, you don’t actually understand the law. You just… predict how a lawyer would
respond to it.