21–30 of 51 posts
This is horrifying. The prosecutor who sought an extradition based on an 85% accurate AI model should be disbarred.
I have bad news about the accuracy of almost all forensic science, especially fingerprints and dna
> While he was incarcerated, Richardson lost his job and his home. He also said he lost custody of two of his children.
Alright. Time to ban AI in policing. It can't be used responsibly, so it can't be used at all.
This is horrifying. The prosecutor who sought an extradition based on an 85% accurate AI model should be disbarred.
Kidnapping and false imprisonment charges seem reasonable.
This isn't just AI misidentification. This is also an eye witness picking him out of a lineup. This is really AI extending the reach of the already sketchy eye witness practice.
> Richardson’s attorney showed time sheets proving he was at work 400 miles away from Florida when the stolen car was sold. Richardson said he has never been to Florida, and his attorney tried to present this evidence for months. I continue to not understand why anyone finds it tolerable for the justice system to move so slowly. I don't want to make excuses for AI identification, but no identification process is perf…
That is the answer to your question.
> Richardson’s attorney showed time sheets proving he was at work 400 miles away from Florida when the stolen car was sold. Richardson said he has never been to Florida, and his attorney tried to present this evidence for months. I continue to not understand why anyone finds it tolerable for the justice system to move so slowly. I don't want to make excuses for AI identification, but no identification process is perf…
Indeed you shouldn't make excuses. "{Sketchy component} is just one part of the process and is harmless in principle because we have other safeguards such as... nothing we care to subject to your scrutiny" is the prototypical excuse of a broken system:
> The office stated, “Facial recognition technology is used as one tool among many available to investigators. In this case, it was one tool, but certainly not the only tool, which lent to the probable cause determination that Mr. Richardson was the perpetrator of these crimes.”
The other tool appears to have been good ol' fashioned racism:
> Richardson alleged racial profiling played a role in his misidentification. “I want to say racial profiling. The guy said it was a guy with dreads and a big nose, and then they picked me out of a lineup of guys that look nothing like me,” Richardson said.
Maddening. This will happen more often in many domains, and it raises the general question of liability. Should it be the AI company that created the model? The company that build the face recognition software using the model? The police department that decided to use the face recognition software? I would assume the police department is the one legally liable, though they may turn around and sue the software company…
85% accurate is doing a lot of hiding LOL. Searching a multi-million-face gallery and even high per-comparison accuray turns into mostly false positive. THese systems are only ever defensible as an investigative lead, neve as probable cause.
What does 85% accurate even mean?
I sent this to my lawyer friends who like to help so hopefully we can get some restitution for him These clowns need to be taken for all the money they can
I don't understand why you would be downvoted. Is your comment raising a pitchfork? Yes. But sometimes when a person's life gets ruined, pitchforks deserve to come out. > Richardson’s attorney showed time sheets proving he was at work 400 miles away from Florida when the stolen car was sold. Richardson said he has never been to Florida, and his attorney tried to present this evidence for months. > Richardson alleged…
> Richardson’s attorney showed time sheets proving he was at work 400 miles away from Florida when the stolen car was sold. Richardson said he has never been to Florida, and his attorney tried to present this evidence for months. I continue to not understand why anyone finds it tolerable for the justice system to move so slowly. I don't want to make excuses for AI identification, but no identification process is perf…
The first word of the article is "Jalil", the name of the person involved. That is the answer to your question.