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

Innocent woman jailed after being misidentified using AI facial recognition

grandforksherald.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 417 posts

Re: Innocent woman jailed after being misidentified using AI facial recognition

#301

Post by arwhatever »

whack wrote: post #51

> According to the court documents, the Fargo detective working the case then looked at Lipps' social media accounts and Tennessee driver's license photo. In his charging document, the detective wrote that Lipps appeared to be the suspect based on facial features, body type and hairstyle and color. > Once they were in hand, Fargo police met with him and Lipps at the Cass County jail on Dec. 19. She had already been i…

Devils advocate: what if a facial recognition system with a large enough database can always find an unrelated/innocent person that looks similar enough to convince the human?

Re: Innocent woman jailed after being misidentified using AI facial recognition

#302

Post by kitd »

crooked-v wrote: post #229
mlinsey wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having a facial recognition match make you a suspect and cause the police to ask you some questions doesn't seem completely unreasonable to me. Investigations can certainly begin with weak forms of evidence (like an anonymous tip), you just require a higher standard of evidence for a search warrant, surveillance, or an arrest. A facial recognition match shouldn't be probable cause for an arrest warrant, but it still…

It is absolutely not reasonable to use low-quality photos to decide someone halfway across the country with no history of even leaving their local area is 'a suspect'.

You wouldn't know they had no history of leaving their local area unless you interviewed them.

Re: Innocent woman jailed after being misidentified using AI facial recognition

#303

Post by vbezhenar »

whack wrote: post #51

> According to the court documents, the Fargo detective working the case then looked at Lipps' social media accounts and Tennessee driver's license photo. In his charging document, the detective wrote that Lipps appeared to be the suspect based on facial features, body type and hairstyle and color. > Once they were in hand, Fargo police met with him and Lipps at the Cass County jail on Dec. 19. She had already been i…

At this point I think that AI will perform human duties better than human. So probably it's better to let AI autonomously jail people, of course with all the necessary procedures as required by law.

Re: Innocent woman jailed after being misidentified using AI facial recognition

#304

Post by mrweasel »

rglover wrote: post #86
whack wrote: post #51

> According to the court documents, the Fargo detective working the case then looked at Lipps' social media accounts and Tennessee driver's license photo. In his charging document, the detective wrote that Lipps appeared to be the suspect based on facial features, body type and hairstyle and color. > Once they were in hand, Fargo police met with him and Lipps at the Cass County jail on Dec. 19. She had already been i…

> How is this the fault of AI? It flagged a possible match. A live human detective confirmed it. Because we're seeing the first instances of what reality looks like with AI in the hands of the average bear. Just like the excuse was "but the computer said it was correct," now we're just shifting to "but the AI said it was correct." Don't underestimate how much authority and thinking people will delegate to machines. N…

It's only recently some have come to terms with the fact that DNA evidence sometimes returns false positives. Society, and law enforcement, assumed that DNA was infallible. No one apparently wondered millions of people could be reduced to a tiny number of genetic markers apparently having no overlap.

Danish police had to redo 20.000 DNA tests with a larger set of markeres begin tested, because they jailed someone based solely on a DNA test and did consider that they might have gotten the wrong person, despite the DNA match. It's essentially a human hash collision.

Identification by AI is going to be the same, except worse, because it's frankly less scientific. Law enforcement, the judicial system and especially the public is simply to uninterested in learning the limitations of these types of systems. Even in the more civilized part of the world police would love to just have the computer tell them who to pick up and where.

Re: Innocent woman jailed after being misidentified using AI facial recognition

#305

Post by pj_mukh »

abustamam wrote: post #288
pj_mukh wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea but this feels like when a Waymo ran over a cat, and a Human driver ran over a toddler and both got the same level of coverage in the media (actually the cat got more follow-up coverage). And I'm supposed to believe both issues are equally important. No. That's gaslighting, and totally misplaced political activation.

What do you propose we do in the latter situation? The news isn't the value of the life that was (presumably lost). The news is the circumstances that made that loss possible. Human driver was maybe careless, or maybe didn't look. The child safety classes I took emphasized over and over again to look around your car and yard before backing your car out. This is a problem with a known solution that unfortunately still…

"This is a problem with a known solution that unfortunately still happens despite the best efforts to prevent it."

Great, let's just apply that logic to Waymo as well and call it a day (see how silly that sounds?). Waymo has engineers..so does the Department of transportation.

Re: Innocent woman jailed after being misidentified using AI facial recognition

#307

Post by entwife »

Here is the contact information for her defense attorney, who was appointed in North Dakota, Jay Greenwood. It is unclear to me when he took up this case.

https://www.ndcourts.gov/lawyers/06020 https://www.linkedin.com/in/jay-greenwood-57360b86/

Re: Innocent woman jailed after being misidentified using AI facial recognition

#308

Post by Y-bar »

kitd wrote: post #302
crooked-v wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is absolutely not reasonable to use low-quality photos to decide someone halfway across the country with no history of even leaving their local area is 'a suspect'.

You wouldn't know they had no history of leaving their local area unless you interviewed them.

Why does not the investigator have to supply some sort of evidence that she has a history of leaving their local area rather than putting the onus on the accused? This line of argument is halfway to "guilty until proven otherwise".

Re: Innocent woman jailed after being misidentified using AI facial recognition

#309

Post by akimbostrawman »

jfengel wrote: post #139
pj_mukh wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry but this is a piss-poor excuse. When I Claude code broken features, I'm responsible 100%. Why are cops not treated the same way? OP is right, AI is totally irrelevant in this story. If the point is "cops can't be trusted". Why do they have GUNS?! AI is the least of your problems. I feel like I'm going crazy with this narrative.

You are exactly correct. Cops cannot be trusted. We spent a lot of time pointing that out in 2020. AI is the least of our problems with policing. Unfortunately, a lot of people are certain it won't happen to them, and it has been practically impossible to establish any kind of accountability. It has only gotten worse since 2020.

Are we just gonna pretend the wide implementation of bodycams hasn't shown that the overwhelming majority of times the cops weren't in the wrong to a point that the same people that demanded them want them gone now?

Re: Innocent woman jailed after being misidentified using AI facial recognition

#310

Post by ThePowerOfFuet »

selcuka wrote: post #203
wvenable wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. The city or state gets sued and they pay the result from the taxpayer funds and literally nobody learns anything, especially not the hard way. Everyone is so completely divorced, and in some cases immune, from consequences that this will change nothing.

After a couple million dollar lawsuits the city or state will learn to be more careful with their methods. It's the taxpayer funds, but it's not an endless supply of money. Cities and states have their own budgets.

No. It's not their money and they don't care.
Post reply on HN