21–30 of 520 posts
Why don't they just redo the analysis with a few other software packages?
Business incentives presumably reward all such companies for helping the police get convictions, so it doesn't seem a far-fetched concern.
Why don't they just redo the analysis with a few other software packages?
Wouldn't this set a precedent to eventually force any forensic software to become open source?
Secret policing and secrecy in prosecution have no place in decent society.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
and surprisingly all of the code is of equal importance so you really need to review each line sequentially! Instead of finding stuff that you think is most likely to relate to what you're trying to figure out and debug from there. Wow I would like to see this marvel of engineering myself!
Kind of makes me wonder: if the argument is that the code is too complex to review and understand, does that mean the company is not doing code reviews themselves?
In short when someone tells me the stuff is too complicated because too clever and advanced I tend to disbelieve them.
that said I have of course written my too complicated stuff lots of times, but if asked I don't say it was because I'm clever.
names anonymized so as to not accidentally hurt anyone's feelings.
on edit: actually one time the code was clever but not especially difficult, they just used the algorithms line because they didn't want anyone messing with their stuff.
Wouldn't this set a precedent to eventually force any forensic software to become open source?
Wouldn't this set a precedent to eventually force any forensic software to become open source?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the code was developed in less than 8.5 years, it seems like the answer must be yes based on their previous claims.
Well I mean if something requires 8 man years of work you can do it in a year with 8 people. Not always, but usually.
It's an important development. Forensic labs and companies are expert witnesses with black box processes and the incentive to protect the authority of their profession. They are as likely to lie as any other witness. Perhaps even moreso. "Those arguing on behalf of the defense cited past problems with other genetic testing software such as STRmix and FST (Forensic Statistical Tool). Defense expert witnesses Mats Heim…
> Forensic labs and companies are expert witnesses with black box processes and the incentive to protect the authority of their profession. I imagine they're also incentivised to favour a result indicating guilt.