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

191–200 of 221 posts

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

#191

Post by 1718627440 »

themafia wrote: post #167
jmye wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> but the fact that you did or what you said to them will not come into evidence in court.

What?? Isn't it that everything you say can be used in court? Aren't interrogations and arrests recorded?

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

#192

Post by 1718627440 »

contrast wrote: post #69
frankharv wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but a judge issued the warrant in the first place. Cops did not do a proper investigation and the judge green-lighted it. It is all on the JUDGE or possibly a magistrate who approved a faulty warrant. The judge failed the poor woman. FIRE him. Then sue Clearview for big bucks.

what's with the weird obsession all over the thread that it is the JUDGE who is the only person at fault here?

The police was wrong, but the judge is the check that is supposed to prevent the police errors from being actually committed.

Sure, when the junior deletes the production database you are also angry at the junior, but you also ask why the junior got permission to do that.

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

#193

Post by xtajv »

pstuart wrote: post #170
retrochameleon wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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

I'm curious, what exactly do you mean by "self-insured"?

(Is the idea to combine literal insurance underwriting for retirement planning with a monetary incentive system for ongoing work performance)?

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

#194

Post by xtajv »

jqpabc123 wrote: post #2

AI is a liability issue waiting to happen. And this is just another example.

It occurs to me that software engineering is just about the only engineering field which is neither licensed nor bonded nor insured.

I wonder if AI / shadow IT will change that.

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

#195

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

nkrisc wrote: post #188
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article says that the Fargo police claimed to have done "additional investigative steps independent of AI". (Perhaps they're lying, or did a poor job because they thought the extra steps were a formality.)

Given the actual outcome it’s hard to imagine what they actually did. It would be less embarrassing for them if they had said they did no additional investigating.

It's not even the right question, really. If they found some crazy coincidence that genuinely seemed to corroborate the identification, it's still not OK that this woman was dragged across the country. They rightly identify that the initial AI scan was wrong to do even if everything that followed was by the book. Our law enforcement processes were developed in a context where this kind of error was much harder because there was no routine way to scan every person in the United States for people who look like your suspect.

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

#196

Post by jqpabc123 »

xtajv wrote: post #194
jqpabc123 wrote: post #2

AI is a liability issue waiting to happen. And this is just another example.

It occurs to me that software engineering is just about the only engineering field which is neither licensed nor bonded nor insured. I wonder if AI / shadow IT will change that.

I wonder if AI / shadow IT will change that.

I doubt it.

Computing has traditionally been all about math and logic. This is really all that a binary logic computer is capable of. When applied to this purpose, it can offer highly accurate results at very low cost.

Current AI is an attempt to branch out from simply calculating into decision making. But it does so in the worst possible way --- using probability and statistics (aka guesswork) instead of logic and reasoning. In other words, AI offers questionable results at high cost.

As this article shows, relying on guesswork is a legal liability issue waiting to happen in many (if not most) operating environments.

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

#197

Post by forshaper »

pstuart wrote: post #170
retrochameleon wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Police in some states are actually self-insured, though not backed by a pension fund.

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

#198

Post by vablings »

helterskelter wrote: post #150
retrochameleon wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I agree with this sentiment but when you start punishing this sort of thing you create more incentive to cover it up. It's a tricky problem and I'm not sure there's a perfect solution. What we really need is a change in police culture.

Medicine has a culture that adapts to this quite well. If you make an honest mistake and communicate it, you are often persecuted by your peers but not hung out to dry legally by your hospital and generally your actions are always defensible.

Similar practices are used in law enforcement, but the legal implications are seemingly more severe

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

#199

Post by xtajv »

jqpabc123 wrote: post #196
xtajv wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It occurs to me that software engineering is just about the only engineering field which is neither licensed nor bonded nor insured. I wonder if AI / shadow IT will change that.

I wonder if AI / shadow IT will change that. I doubt it. Computing has traditionally been all about math and logic. This is really all that a binary logic computer is capable of. When applied to this purpose, it can offer highly accurate results at very low cost. Current AI is an attempt to branch out from simply calculating into decision making. But it does so in the worst possible way --- using probability and stat…

Heh, I wasn't suggesting that AI would actually replace decision-making. Rather, I wonder whether attempts to use AI in this way would result in such publicly-embarassing and catastrophic outcomes that software engineers might decide to organize professional guardrails about it.

I fully agree, this seems like a legal liability issue waiting to happen.

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

#200

Post by kbelder »

krferriter wrote: post #70
cguess wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an aside AP Style is not use an Oxford comma, and that's been the rule for 50+ years https://www.prnewsonline.com/explainer-how-to-use-oxford-com...

AP Style is simply wrong on this, then.

Well, omitting the Oxford comma is the traditionally correct thing to do. I use the Oxford comma, it makes sense, but it is new. A hundred years ago it would have been considered an error by nearly every editor.
Post reply on HN