Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let alone all it takes is a photo and a voice clip of 10sec to create an imitation of that person confessing to whatever your heart desires.
An old phone book is enough.
Hows wolfie doing?
Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases
61–70 of 210 posts
Re: Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases
#62Can we know the motivation? Will it get them a bonus at the end of the year? Was it something common in the cases, maybe similar victims or something else?
Re: Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
> large double-digit percentage This is a very very intense claim, and if true, would represent a monumental institutional failure across hundreds or even thousands of disparate organizations. Do you have any data to support your hunch? Strong claims require strong evidence.
Shouldn't it be the exact opposite here ? The burden of proof is the other way around. The big claim is here: the state has grandiose claims that the overwhelming majority is fair, but there is no proof of it. Therefore the state should prove that more than 90% of the cases are legitimate, fair, not coerced, and not motivated by the pressure to interrupt the proceedings. 97% of people choose plea deals or out-of-cour…
> Shouldn't it be the exact opposite here ? The burden of proof is the other way around
That's the rule for criminal court in the US, but each of us is free to pick his own standard for his own purposes.
Re: Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases
#64[dead]
Re: Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases
#65Re: Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
When DNA matching was introduced, we discovered that at minimum 10% of people on death row were innocent. Death row cases are among the most litigated and examined cases. So, 10% is a reasonable floor, and we're already in double digits.
> This reasonably sets a floor I disagree wrt reasonableness. It’s just too big a leap. There are a lot of crimes, and not many land you on death row.
The observation was that death row represents the highest level of scrutiny, and still had 10% false positives for guilt.
Is there any argument that less-scrutinized cases would have a lower level of false convictions?
Re: Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases
#67Re: Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really. End result is the same: manipulated image.
Are we really pretending like the effort to do something doesn't affect how often that thing occurs?
Are we acting like that was ever a limiting factor towards disseminating propaganda in the analog age?
Re: Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases
#69Can we know the motivation? Will it get them a bonus at the end of the year? Was it something common in the cases, maybe similar victims or something else?
I'd wager that it was just a shortcut to getting his work done. That banal motive is why we've seen an explosion of these cases and why they won't stop.
Re: Police officer investigated for using AI to 'create evidence' in multiple cases
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here in the US? Probably a large double-digit percentage of cases imo…
> large double-digit percentage This is a very very intense claim, and if true, would represent a monumental institutional failure across hundreds or even thousands of disparate organizations. Do you have any data to support your hunch? Strong claims require strong evidence.
An important thing you should recognize: the judicial system is painfully nontransparent in such a way that even figuring this sort of thing takes an extensive amount of time and is often even impossible. I've personally gone down a similar route (did some journalism for a bit) by trying to understand how shotspotter is used in prosecution, many of which resulted in false arrests and many, many years of life lost across all the people arrested falsely from it.
If you would like to begin trying to answer these, I recommend starting with submitting some FOIAs. Considering your stance seems to be that you won't believe what others are telling you -- I promise you that you'll be surprised.