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

371–380 of 417 posts

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

#371

Post by dghlsakjg »

throwaway17_17 wrote: post #265
throwaway173738 wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the taxpayers owe this lady at least a couple million if not more for the inconvenience they chose to put her through.

I agree, but our system doesn’t value things that way. Texas, which is one of the highest paying States for cases where intentional, fraudulent, or grossly negligent actions result in wrongful incarceration pay $80,000 dollars per year a person is locked up. But the caveat is that time only starts counting after you are sentenced, so wouldn’t even apply in TFA’s case.

That's statutory damages on a wrongful conviction.

This is an entirely different situation, and the amount would not be statutory.

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

#372

Post by YCpedohaven »

rectang wrote: post #64
vkou wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a fix to it. Elect people who will hold them accountable. As long as you keep electing clowns that let the police do whatever they want, the police will... Do whatever they want.

“Tough on crime” -> lenient on police -> innocent grandmas in jail.

[dead]

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

#373

Post by ifh-hn »

renewiltord wrote: post #157
ifh-hn wrote: post #148

Just reading the headline I said to myself: bet this is in America. Every time I see something like this I can never quite believe this sort of stuff happens. Complete, life ruining incompetence, with no consequences for the idiots that caused this to happen. Ignoring the AI input, which to me has nothing to do with this (it was used as a tool to identify a potential suspect), this woman went to jail for 5 months on…

Indeed. Something like the Post Office Scandal would never happen anywhere but in the US.

True, though it's hardly a like for like comparison, but on the flip side of that, something is being done now at least. This woman has been monumentally fucked over and no one is going to help her.

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

#374

Post by RobotToaster »

mrweasel wrote: post #304
rglover wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 bas…

DNA can also be completely faked https://www.technologyreview.com/2009/08/17/210960/how-dna-e...

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

#375

Post by dragonwriter »

JuniperMesos wrote: post #331
dragonwriter wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With all other proof you mentioned, there was always a human putting his signature. There was a human doing that in this case; AI doesn’t inititiate charges. “In his charging document, the detective wrote that Lipps appeared to be the suspect based on facial features, body type and hairstyle and color.”

The article could have - but didn't - mention this specific Fargo police detective's name.

The article not mentioning the name does not change that the detective did sign the police charging documents.

(Nor does the omission in the article of other names and procedural details change the fact that for there to be actual criminal charges, an arrest warrant, extradition, and incarceration, a number of other people had to sign their names to official acts, including, among others, at least one public prosecutor, and more than one judge.)

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

#376

Post by entwife »

ThePowerOfFuet wrote: post #312
entwife wrote: post #307

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/

What did you hope to achieve by posting his details?

It seems like Angela Lipps needs some help. There's no "Go Fund Me" or similar information associated with the article. Perhaps her (former) attorney could provide more information.

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

#377

Post by renewiltord »

ifh-hn wrote: post #373
renewiltord wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. Something like the Post Office Scandal would never happen anywhere but in the US.

True, though it's hardly a like for like comparison, but on the flip side of that, something is being done now at least. This woman has been monumentally fucked over and no one is going to help her.

13 people are dead in the postal service scandal, dude. This woman is alive. "Something is being done now at least". What? Are they resurrecting them? The Archbishop of Canterbury himself is out there making Lazarus real, is he?

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

#378

Post by caconym_ »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #291
caconym_ wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't agree that facial recognition software is involved in a case of a woman being misidentified by facial recognition software then there is no point in me spending any more time/effort in conversation with you. Goodbye.

You seem to be intentionally ignoring the point I made. I never disputed that facial recognition software was used (ie involved). The facial recognition tool didn't arrest her. It holds no authority, has no will of its own, and does not possess a corporeal form with which to enact change in the world. The only parties that could possibly be at fault here are various government agents who clearly acted with negligence…

> I never disputed that facial recognition software was used

You, yesterday:

> I honestly don't see what AI had to do with anything here.

???

> You seem to be intentionally ignoring the point I made.

I completely understand your point. You are saying that if a mentally ill high schooler manages to acquire a gun and kills 20 people at their school, we should a) punish the shooter, and b) understand the gun as a neutral object that simply popped into existence and was misused, rather than a machine whose design purpose is to kill humans, and whose manufacturer(s) (and other organizations who profit from the easy availability of guns) are actively engaged in a broad effort to preserve the status quo which allowed a mentally ill high schooler to acquire a gun and massacre 20 of their classmates/teachers.

I think it's a terrible opinion, and I vehemently disagree with it. But if you are willing to engage in the sort of rhetorical contortions highlighted at the top of this comment, there is no point in expressing my disagreements to you, because you will evidently say literally anything in response. I may as well have a debate about toilet tank design with `cat /dev/urandom`.

> If you're unable to rebut my point then perhaps you should consider that you might be in the wrong?

Try looking in the mirror, buddy. Sheesh.

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

#379

Post by wvenable »

nbernard wrote: post #297
wvenable wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More than $1.5 billion has been spent to settle claims of police misconduct involving thousands of officers repeatedly accused of wrongdoing. https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/interactive/20...

Good point! It shows that the settlements are far too low and that the victims should get a lot more. If a few cities/states were to default due to debts coming from such cases, the others would start to take notice...

Why won't we just dole out real punishments instead of an indirect chain of money? Money is not the solution to everything.

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

#380

Post by FireBeyond »

akimbostrawman wrote: post #309
jfengel wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Citation needed. Who are these people who wanted improved police oversight who are supposedly now fighting for the removal of bodycams?
Post reply on HN