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

211–220 of 221 posts

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

#211

Post by bdangubic »

tremon wrote: post #210
xtajv wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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)?

They mean that penalties and restitutions for wrongful prosecutions and wrongful convictions should not come from taxpayer money but private insurance. Right now, police departments feel zero pain from judgements against them so they have no reason to structurally correct their behaviour.

how is police going to pay for private insurance though? from police officer salaries (which come from taxpayers)?

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

#212

Post by not2b »

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…

Clearview again. ICE is using it too, and their people think it is an oracle that is always correct, so that when someone shows a passport card or a RealID showing that they are someone else, a US citizen or permanent resident, they are usually accused of having a fake ID. It's a flawed tool and it misidentifies people sometimes.

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

#213

Post by tovej »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #126
tovej wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Systems are also a tool. Whoever institutes and helps build the system that systematically results in harm is also responsible. That would be the vendors, the system planners, and the institutions that greenlit this. It would also include the larger financial tech circle that is trying to drive large scale AI adoption. Like Peter Thiel, who sees technology as an "alternative to politics". I.e. a way to circumvent dem…

Nonsense. The manufacturer, distributor, and vendor of a hammer are not liable for its misuse. We already litigated and then legislated this regarding guns in the US. As much as I detest Clearview and Thiel the fault for this incident falls squarely on the justice system.

Your first paragraph conflates the system with the tool. Please at least parse what I wrote before you respond.

You are also conflating legality and morality. The US gun industry being good at lobbying has no bearing on whether an industry that enables mass school shootings is accountable or not. I mean it clearly is. Just compare gun deaths in the US to any civilized nation and you'll see that gun control is the moral and sane approach.

A hammer/gun is not the same as the wider hammer/gun industrial system, and the societal systems it is a part of. The justice system is a part of that. So even though you say you disagree, somehow you still agree?

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

#214

Post by fc417fc802 »

tovej wrote: post #213
fc417fc802 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nonsense. The manufacturer, distributor, and vendor of a hammer are not liable for its misuse. We already litigated and then legislated this regarding guns in the US. As much as I detest Clearview and Thiel the fault for this incident falls squarely on the justice system.

Your first paragraph conflates the system with the tool. Please at least parse what I wrote before you respond. You are also conflating legality and morality. The US gun industry being good at lobbying has no bearing on whether an industry that enables mass school shootings is accountable or not. I mean it clearly is. Just compare gun deaths in the US to any civilized nation and you'll see that gun control is the mor…

> Your first paragraph conflates the system with the tool.

No, it responds to the claim you made. You asserted that systems are also tools and attributed fault on that basis. Perhaps at least reread your own comment before condescending.

> You are also conflating legality and morality.

Also incorrect. I understood you to be claiming tool vendors to bear both legal and moral responsibility; perhaps I misunderstood. Regardless, my position is that tool vendors bear neither of those more or less unconditionally. The only way a tool vendor can become responsible in any sense (IMO) is if they knowingly and intentionally facilitate a particular outcome. The manufacturer of a hammer, gun, or AI facial recognition system is never at fault for what the user does with it unless they actively encouraged that particular use.

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

#215

Post by account42 »

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.

Add even more disincentives for coverups (i.e. hard prison time) and rewards for whistleblowers.

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

#217

Post by tovej »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #214
tovej wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your first paragraph conflates the system with the tool. Please at least parse what I wrote before you respond. You are also conflating legality and morality. The US gun industry being good at lobbying has no bearing on whether an industry that enables mass school shootings is accountable or not. I mean it clearly is. Just compare gun deaths in the US to any civilized nation and you'll see that gun control is the mor…

> Your first paragraph conflates the system with the tool. No, it responds to the claim you made. You asserted that systems are also tools and attributed fault on that basis. Perhaps at least reread your own comment before condescending. > You are also conflating legality and morality. Also incorrect. I understood you to be claiming tool vendors to bear both legal and moral responsibility; perhaps I misunderstood. Re…

The AI companies are very obviously facilitating particular outcomes.

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

#218

Post by rcvassallo83 »

FireBeyond wrote: post #141
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’s a judge down in Texas, Dallas area I believe, who is in social media a lot because he will excoriate prosecutors who bring bs in to his court room. He’s not soft on crime but hard on rights and process. If a defendant did the wrong thing, he will have the appropriate amount of sympathy, down to zero. At times he will tell them, we all know you got lucky here, do better. But he won’t let prosecutors slate by o…

Scary process is an understatement, especially because I was facing a domestic violence charge.

Long story short, emotional abusive partner got drunk and verbally combative, despite my attempts to de-escalate. When nothing worked I went into my bedroom and locked the door. She started pounding on the door and demanded her things. I gave them to her and told her she needs a ride home she no longer welcome. She verbally abused and provoked me for 10 minutes before getting in her car. Took the keys, called 911. She grabbed me causing us both to fall a few minutes before the cops arrived and told them I threw her to the ground. We both had a couple scapes so they arrested us both.

Interfered with the 911 call, filed a false police report, assaulted me, caused property damage. She got charged with class c assault only and a dismissal. I felt like I was seen as guilty until proven innocent.

Fortunately I recorded all her verbal abuse (prosecution tried to use it against me and brought in DV expert to explain both her conduct and my 911 call as typical in IPV cases)

Fortunately the jury didn't buy it. I was literally being threatened with violence in my own home for telling her to leave. Between that and the bodycam statements contradicting her testimony I was shocked that they didn't drop the charges or offer a favorable plea deal.

The judge was absolutely fair, prosecutor bent on punishment, alleged victim was attempting to ruin my life (as captured in my audio)

Whew!

In the end the claims were so obviously fabricated that my attorney made no defense. It was clear that the accuser was not credible.

Perjury was provable. No consequences for her. This happened in Brazoria county

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

#219

Post by rcvassallo83 »

bko wrote: post #157
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…

> The narrative they "investigated" was so obviously false, bodycam evidence directly contradicted multiple key facts. Officials are interested only seeking to prove the case. Thankfully the jury came to the right verdict. I don't get it, if they only care about prosecuting and proving the case, wouldn't they go by the bodycam evidence? They didn't prove the case. Maybe if their incentive was to prosecute and prove t…

In my experience, the narrative the prosecutor argued on behalf of the accuser was obviously false because specific key facts were contradicted by bodycam statements, for example

"He took my phone and it was dead" -> bodycam showed her using the phone when police arrived

I provided a recording of my accuser clearly being drunk, aggressive, threatening me while I was de-escalating. I was the one who called 911 to stop her from drunk driving. Her speech clearly slurred.

Instead of realizing her story doesn't add up, the prosecutor brought in a DV expert to explain how it's typical for abusers to call 911 and that her behavior was a normal reaction to being assaulted.

Thankfully, the jury knew better.

Post reply on HN