Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit • Hacker News Board

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#361

Post by jjeaff » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 10:17 PM UTC

bargl wrote: post #357

meowface wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These cases also often come up with drug and alcohol detection tests, and as John Oliver points out in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1f2iawp0y5Y , software used to select jurors. All of these companies claim that their source code is valuable intellectual property and that disclosing it can hurt their business. Even if this were true, when you're providing something that can be a significant factor in someone being…

Without jumping on the conspiracy bandwagon, I'd also like to see this applied to voting software. I know it's a hot topic, and I'm honestly not trying to get political. Software that is critical to our fundamental human rights, and is being used by our government should be open source, or at least audited by a group of people who sign Non-competes/NDA and can't go work for competitors, or with some other mechanism t…

I agree, for my own piece of mind. But I am also certain that it would have made no difference in our current predicament with a third of the country thinking the election was stolen.

It has been shown to us time and time again that no actual evidence is required to get people to believe what they want to believe.

And the more technical the evidence (i.e. source code), the less helpful.

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#362

Post by hutzlibu » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 10:18 PM UTC

cyberlurker wrote: post #339

lotsofpulp wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have the same line of reasoning when people talk about having enough to feel secure. Even simple civil legal matters cost in the tens of thousands of dollars easy. And the system works so that you’re either rich enough to be able to defend yourself and the money spent doesn’t affect you, you’re poor enough that you have nothing to lose, or you’re in the middle, busy trying to get from poor to rich, but you are vuln…

Yes, that middle zone (that most of us probably live in) is terrifying. And it’s why we get conned into so many different types of insurance. “One disaster and all that progress is gone.”

"Yes, that middle zone (that most of us probably live in) is terrifying"

More terrifying than the bottom where you got nothing to loose? I doubt it. Otherwise, why be afraid of it?

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#363

Post by frongpik » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 10:18 PM UTC

ineedasername wrote: post #324

If ever there was something that should be fully transparent it is the mechanisms by which a person might be found guilty of a crime. The defendant shouldn't even have had to fight for this. It should be a fundamental cornerstone of criminal prosecutions.

Nothing is going to change until this software convicts a 10M net worth dude for something he didn't do.

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#364

Post by drstewart » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 10:21 PM UTC

IgorPartola wrote: post #208

IG_Semmelweiss wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i think we can all agree that black boxes are not desirable. But let's not jump the gun here, and assume ill-intent.... to explain something that can be attributed to negligence, or simple human error.

When your negligence results in people wrongfully spending decades in prison I would argue that it ought to be criminal negligence. If your software does not produce results that are accurate, precise, and have confidence intervals included, how OK are you with people going to prison based on them?

>I would argue that it ought to be criminal negligence

I would like a thorough analysis of everything you've ever learned that led you to this conclusion, and if we find one mistake in your lifetime of learning then this is also criminal negligence on your part.

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#365

Post by buzzerbetrayed » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 10:22 PM UTC

phire wrote: post #93

> The co-founder of the company, Mark Perlin, is said to have argued against source code analysis by claiming that the program, consisting of 170,000 lines of MATLAB code, is so dense it would take eight and a half years to review at a rate of ten lines an hour. First, the defence doesn't necessarily have to evaluate all 170,000 lines. They just need to find one buggy line which could potentially overturn the result.…

Wait until you hear how long it would take at a rate of 2 lines per hour, as long as we're just throwing out random numbers.

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#366

Post by cozzyd » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 10:25 PM UTC

ashtonkem wrote: post #199

flavius29663 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

have you ever seen MATLAB code?

That’s actually a pretty good argument for banning such code from the criminal justice system. The idea that unreadable code is deciding who gets locked up is really worrying.

and depending on which MATLAB version they run it in, it might have completely different results if they haven't tested carefully...

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#367

Post by hluska » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 10:26 PM UTC

Spivak wrote: post #265

bdavisx wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would also give every person convicted using their software an incentive to open an appeal.

I like how this is considered a bad thing. Like we can’t let this guy point out that he’s being convicted by an unauditable black box that suddenly isn’t worth using if it has to stand up to scrutiny because then everyone would want to. The horror. Like I’m actually kinda shocked this is the reality. I would have assumed that DNA evidence would have some blessed methodologies and tools/algorithms, with a strict defin…

This is one of these scary areas where reality matches my teenaged experiences playing Shadowrun. I used to hope that the brutal dystopia we played through was just fun. Now I’m seeing that the present needs a word even more brutal than dystopia. :(

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#368

Post by hluska » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 10:27 PM UTC

jabits wrote: post #334

melq wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>making the prosecutor kind of a criminal. Never met a lawyer before huh? Jokes aside, prosecutors pushing through cases they know to be unsound isn't exactly uncommon. Many prosecutors are more concerned with their conviction rates than they are in justice, because that's what they are measured and rewarded by.

I think you are wrong and that most prosecutors want to do the right thing, like most working people

Sadly, evidence contradicts that thought. It shouldn’t but it does.

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#369

Post by sdenton4 » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 10:28 PM UTC

knolan wrote: post #316

breck wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol. If it would take 8.5 yrs to review, it's probably god awful, and should never ever ever be used to convict someone of such a crime. My prediction: this firm will probably try to get removed from the case, rather than open source their shitty code. Source: I've worked on MATLAB codebases for various genomics research projects in the past.

170,000 lines of Matlab code for a project is not a good sign. Unless they’re also including the source of various Matlab toolboxes which are already tested by the Mathworks. It’s such a high-level language it’s hard to imagine what the hell they’re doing with all that code. It’s probably mostly useless cruft from GUIDE.

My guess is a bit of each: The company high-balling the LoC estimate to try to impress/scare the judge, but prooobably also has a truly terrible codebase.

Re: Accused murderer wins right to check source code of DNA testing kit

#370

Post by jjkaczor » Mon, Feb 08, 2021, 10:30 PM UTC

maceurt wrote: post #315

phire wrote: post #93

> The co-founder of the company, Mark Perlin, is said to have argued against source code analysis by claiming that the program, consisting of 170,000 lines of MATLAB code, is so dense it would take eight and a half years to review at a rate of ten lines an hour. First, the defence doesn't necessarily have to evaluate all 170,000 lines. They just need to find one buggy line which could potentially overturn the result.…

It shouldn't take 10 lines an hour should it? I don't have experience reviewing professional code of this size, so please correct me if my assumption is wrong, but that number doesn't seem right.

As part of a quality control team, I personally went through over 1.2 million lines of working code (i.e. not including comments) over the span of about 8 months, M-F, 9am-5pm.

So, yeah - this number is bunk.