Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 520 posts

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#301

Post by brutal_chaos_ »

Disclaimer, I am FOR seeing the source in these cases.

Say the defense finds the software in a very, very troubling state. Could that be telling enough to not trust the outcomes of the software? Assuming the DNA parts were correct, but the rest is junk, this is where the plaintiff would bring in their expert to counter the arguments?

Perhaps ^ is just a weak argument. I don't know how well versed courts are in these matters. (My guess is NOT that well versed because of the CFAA of the 80's up to Aaron Schwartz, and more).

My legal background is Law and Order, so I have no idea what I'm talking about, just curious.

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#302

Post by eeZah7Ux »

Falling3 wrote: post #297
WaitWaitWha wrote: post #288

The tone of this thread is leaning to "forensics evil, government lackeys out to get the little guy". In the USA, all sides can call and rely on their own forensics. There is no government mandated & approved single-source-of-truth (with some minor exceptions). > Forensic labs and companies are expert witnesses with black box processes and the incentive to protect the authority of their profession. This statement is…

> In the USA, all sides can call and rely on their own forensics. ... to the extent their financial resources allow.

...which can be extremely different between parties leading to EXTREMELY biased outcomes.

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#303

Post by sdflhasjd »

radu_floricica wrote: post #197
sdflhasjd wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A tool designed to find people guilty is biased to find people guilty. I don't see those particular issues make it biased, just inaccurate - it could go either way.

And yet somehow whenever you take a closer look at mislabeled product prices, the average is always in favor of the store. And that's far from the only industry. Complex tools are the product of many thousands of individual decisions taken by humans, humans aware of who's the paying client.

I still believe Hanlons razor applies. I've seen products that have serious performance affecting bugs caused by similar mistakes.

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#304

Post by Falling3 »

eeZah7Ux wrote: post #302
Falling3 wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the USA, all sides can call and rely on their own forensics. ... to the extent their financial resources allow.

...which can be extremely different between parties leading to EXTREMELY biased outcomes.

Exactly.

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#305

Post by tal8d »

WaitWaitWha wrote: post #288

The tone of this thread is leaning to "forensics evil, government lackeys out to get the little guy". In the USA, all sides can call and rely on their own forensics. There is no government mandated & approved single-source-of-truth (with some minor exceptions). > Forensic labs and companies are expert witnesses with black box processes and the incentive to protect the authority of their profession. This statement is…

> There are no "black box processes".

Do you know how much of the fingerprint match process is left up to the judgement of the examiner? You can't get much more "black box" than another person's brain. Last time I checked (several years ago), tool mark analysis was still without objective foundation. Also... bitemark analysis - that was a thing.

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#306

Post by dhdhhdd »

WaitWaitWha wrote: post #288

The tone of this thread is leaning to "forensics evil, government lackeys out to get the little guy". In the USA, all sides can call and rely on their own forensics. There is no government mandated & approved single-source-of-truth (with some minor exceptions). > Forensic labs and companies are expert witnesses with black box processes and the incentive to protect the authority of their profession. This statement is…

My experience is the following testimony: "i put the following parameters to the following program and this was the result.".

Potentially explainig why the given pareters were chosen.

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#307

Post by bluntfang »

jdsalaro wrote: post #248
heavyset_go wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They fill a similar role to prosecutors that field drug tests serve to cops[1]: they aren't meant to be accurate, they exist to give the cops legitimacy as they proceed to do whatever it is they wanted to do to you. In the cops' case, they need legitimacy to search and arrest you, and in the prosecutors' case, they need legitimacy to charge and convict you. If field drug tests were actually accurate, they wouldn't be…

> They fill a similar role to prosecutors that field drug tests serve to cops[1]: they aren't meant to be accurate, they exist to give the the cops legitimacy as they proceed to do whatever it is they wanted to do to you. In the cops' case, they need legitimacy to search and arrest you, and in the prosecutors' case, they need legitimacy to charge and convict you. In case any of you are interested, or completely flabb…

Wow, think about what it takes to be an elected official (Sheriff) and not only perjure, lie, and coerce witnesses, but be outed for all of those crimes, and then continue to run for election and continue your tenure for decades. How does someone live with themselves knowing they purposely put an innocent man on death row, and then CONTINUE YOUR CAREER, probably thinking yourself as successful?

The guilt I feel when I introduce a software bug that effects my corporate customers can sometimes burn my motivation for WEEKS. Who are these people?!

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#308

Post by kazinator »

> Mark Perlin, is said to have argued against source code analysis by claiming that the program, consisting of 170,000 lines of MATLAB code, is so dense it would take eight and a half years to review at a rate of ten lines an hour

What an deplorably dishonest argument to present to laypeople.

If there is some weakness in it so the accused has a way to plausibly deny the DNA test, it will take a consultant who has relevant competence something like week or two to find it.

Finding a problem doesn't require looking at every line of 170,000.

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#309

Post by JoeAltmaier »

tsimionescu wrote: post #300
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The skepticism has to end somewhere. Else ever court case becomes an infinite regressing into doubting the foundations of everything. Of course self-certification is not the best. To bring up that straw man (as most of these posts do) is not advancing the conversation.

That straw man is essentially the status quo at the moment...

Reread the comment being responded to? It started with that, suggested an alternative. Anything helpful to add?

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#310

Post by tsimionescu »

kart23 wrote: post #278
curryst wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Compile it, run it with the same inputs the prosecution claims was provided, and see if you get the same result. That's sorta the point of computers, right? Same inputs on the same program, same output? One difficulty here is that the input is a real world effect. That means the answers are rarely exactly the same. The last time I looked, breathalyzers have a ~50% margin of error. So if you blow a 0.06, your BAC is…

>The last time I looked, breathalyzers have a ~50% margin of error Source on this? I know the portable ones are like this, but I thought the actual court-admissible ones are more accurate, and the calibration procedures need to be followed to get a conviction. Also, FSTs are quite good for preliminary screening, a proper HGN test especially. And if you ask for a blood test, they are required to give you one and consi…

> [Cops] don't want to be bothering normal people, they want to be taking real dangerous and irresponsible drivers off the road.

That's the nice theory we all wish we lived in, but the reality all over the world is that police will extremely often do things for their own petty reasons, often systematically. Police departments often have quotas for tickets, they can often extract a bribe by threatening someone with a DUI, they can simply want to scare 'undesirables' out of a 'nice neighborhood'.

In general, there are good reasons to be extremely weary of the police and their motives.

Post reply on HN