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

Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 221 posts

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#161

Post by rootusrootus »

zephen wrote: post #89
rootusrootus wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It says the national average is just slightly above average IQ. Sounds fine.

> Sounds fine. Really? Maybe your perception of the "average" person is colored by where you live and who you interact with. In any case, the dumber they are, the more lethal they are. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01602...

I've been called an intellectual snob before, because I tended to look down on people unfairly. I've even been tested (with a real test, not some online crap) as having a fairly high IQ. So I find it interesting that I'm now being accused of thinking too highly of the ~50% of the population with IQ between 85 and 115.

In any case I stand by my assessment. Someone with a 100 IQ is perfectly capable of being a competent, well behaved police officer. And while your article suggests that lethality increases with lower IQs, I do think some of the biggest assholes I've ever had the displeasure of interacting with were legitimately brilliant otherwise. I wouldn't want them given power over others.

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#162

Post by fc417fc802 »

cucumber3732842 wrote: post #160
fc417fc802 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like a recipe for domestic terrorism - the systemic disenfranchisement of people who have done nothing wrong for no apparent reason other than sheer greed. How long has this been in effect there?

The system doesn't push the issue on people who can't afford it. Blood from a stone and all that.

I'm confused. Are you suggesting such a ridiculous system is letting class B felonies slide here? That would certainly be the pragmatic approach to being evil but in that case simply treating it as regular debt and going through civil channels would be more than sufficient.

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#163

Post by rootusrootus »

FireBeyond wrote: post #145
fc417fc802 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TBF isn't it rather unreasonable that our system permits your home to be foreclosed while you're detained prior to a hearing? Also rather unreasonable to arrest someone who is clearly neither violent nor a flight risk. You could literally hold the trial via video conference at that point and there would be no downside.

At the risk of sounding like more of an anarchist (irony, autocorrect went with absurdist which isn’t entirely wrong either) than I might usually feel, that all depends on who you believe the system is for and works for? If you believe it’s “capitalism” as been so often proven, then it could be said that it’s entirely “reasonable”.

> depends on who you believe the system is for and works for

We are still enough of a democracy to blame ourselves for this. We could choose that the system is of the people, by the people, for the people. I think too many of us simply don't agree with that, except in the narrow situation where we are talking about ourself.

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#164

Post by rootusrootus »

FireBeyond wrote: post #147
cogman10 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real problem here is she'll get money, who knows how much, but that ultimately does nothing to actually address the problems in the system. Effectively it just raises taxes to cover the cost of these failed prosecutions. Everytime one of these cases happens, a cop and a prosecutor should be out of a job permanently. Possibly even jailed. The false arrest should lose the cop their job and get them blacklisted, the…

> The false arrest should lose the cop their job and get them blacklisted There is actually a federal register for LEOs that have been terminated for cause or resigned to avoid termination. The police unions that operate in the jurisdictions that employ 70% of US police have negotiated into their CBAs that the register “cannot be used for hiring or promotional decisions”. Read into that what you will.

> police unions

... test my support for the idea of unionization. I have even said in the past that I think public sector unions are especially important because their boss (the people) are the most capricious and malicious of all.

Maybe we could find a way to put guardrails on what they could and could not negotiate into a contract. Wages, benefits, basic job environmental conditions, stuff like that -- okay. But administrative policies which exist to prevent bad behavior should be non-negotiable.

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#165

Post by rootusrootus »

cogman10 wrote: post #152
FireBeyond wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The false arrest should lose the cop their job and get them blacklisted There is actually a federal register for LEOs that have been terminated for cause or resigned to avoid termination. The police unions that operate in the jurisdictions that employ 70% of US police have negotiated into their CBAs that the register “cannot be used for hiring or promotional decisions”. Read into that what you will.

I'm generally pretty for unions, but the police union is one that's a complete cancer on society. It pretty much solely exists to make sure cops are free to harm the public without any sort of accountability.

Agreed. And I think we really, really need to put more effort into a "police the police" organization. Someone who has power only over the police, who the police do not have power over, to act as a check.

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#166

Post by Larrikin »

themafia wrote: post #108
firefoxd wrote: post #30

Without even looking at the AI part, I have a single question: Did anybody investigate? That's it. Whether it's AI that flagged her, or a witness who saw her, or her IP address appeared on the logs. Did anybody bothered to ask her "where were you the morning of july 10th between 3 and 4pm. But that's not what happened, they saw the data and said "we got her". But this is the worst part of the story: > And after her o…

> Whether it's AI that flagged her It absolutely was. There's no question of this. Now we need to ask how was the system marketed, what did the police pay for it, how were they trained to use it? > anybody bothered to ask her "where were you the morning of july 10th between 3 and 4pm. Legally that amounts "hearsay" and cannot have any value. Those statements probably won't even be admissible in court without other su…

You don't know what hearsay means

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#167

Post by themafia »

jmye wrote: post #134
themafia wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Whether it's AI that flagged her It absolutely was. There's no question of this. Now we need to ask how was the system marketed, what did the police pay for it, how were they trained to use it? > anybody bothered to ask her "where were you the morning of july 10th between 3 and 4pm. Legally that amounts "hearsay" and cannot have any value. Those statements probably won't even be admissible in court without other su…

> Legally that amounts "hearsay" and cannot have any value. Those statements probably won't even be admissible in court without other supporting facts entered in first. I just want to understand your argument: you believe that any alibi provided is hearsay, and has no legal value, and that they can't even take the statement in order to validate it? That's your position?

The condition here being she was already arrested. You don't arrest someone first and then try to establish their alibi second. That would be an investigation which would be prior to getting a warrant which would allow you to arrest someone. You will never talk yourself out of an arrest, you might talk yourself out of an investigation.

You can offer your story to the police but the fact that you did or what you said to them will not come into evidence in court. You cannot call the officer to the stand and then ask them to repeat in court what you said. That would be "hearsay." So, for a lot of reasons, if you're already arrested, you probably don't even want to tell them any of that. It can only be used against you and never for you. Get your lawyer and have them ready the case to prove that alibi for you.

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#168

Post by deaux »

3eb7988a1663 wrote: post #135
segmondy wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have more faith in the country than I do.

Normally, I would be a bit more grim, but people love their animals. I pray even the staunchest authoritarian would see the injustice of losing a dog.

You're not aware of Noem killing her dog by shooting it in the face, lining up three horses and shooting them, while being proud of it all?

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#169

Post by deaux »

rootusrootus wrote: post #163
FireBeyond wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the risk of sounding like more of an anarchist (irony, autocorrect went with absurdist which isn’t entirely wrong either) than I might usually feel, that all depends on who you believe the system is for and works for? If you believe it’s “capitalism” as been so often proven, then it could be said that it’s entirely “reasonable”.

> depends on who you believe the system is for and works for We are still enough of a democracy to blame ourselves for this. We could choose that the system is of the people, by the people, for the people. I think too many of us simply don't agree with that, except in the narrow situation where we are talking about ourself.

We could just overcome the tens of billions shoved into our faces aimed at undermining it and brainwashing us, and choose that the system is of the people?

The deck is so unbelievably stacked against it.

Another thing: many people hav e been permitted to vote in let's say 40 elections (at different levels), out of which maybe 1 had a candidate that indeed supported a "system that is of the people", and 39 didn't. Gets tough then doesn't it.

Re: Police used AI facial recognition to wrongly arrest TN woman for crimes in ND

#170

Post by pstuart »

retrochameleon wrote: post #121
rcvassallo83 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing about the legal system is there's no incentive to investigate to find the truth. The incentive is to prosecte and prove the charges. Speaking from the experience of being falsely accused after calling 911 to stop a drunk woman from driving. The narrative they "investigated" was so obviously false, bodycam evidence directly contradicted multiple key facts. Officials are interested only seeking to prove the c…

There needs to be consequences for shitty, procedure-ignoring police work. Period. Minimum 1 year of jail time for grossly wrongful arrests that could be avoided with standard procedure or investigation tactics that were not applied.

These dialogs always prompt me to chime in with my solution: make the police be self-insured, backed by their pension fund.

The police today have zero incentive to serve the public, they have zero skin in the game and can literally get away with murder.

Any time you hear the call for "law and order", that is the audience that supports the current system, because they like it like this.

Post reply on HN