401–410 of 417 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which means that, if the cops (and other relevant personnel) gets it wrong, they should get served with the same injustices that they committed, no questions asked... you know, because they didn't raise any when they were the ones dishing out punishments. Edit: wording, formatting
>if the cops (and other relevant personnel) gets it wrong, they should get served with the same injustices that they committed What if no one would want to work as a policemen and you end up alone against local gang?
This is by far the worst argument. What if we held doctors accountable for malpractice and no one wanted to be a doctor? What if we held engineers liable for faulty designs that break and kill people and no one wanted to be an engineer? What if we held OCCUPATION accountable for DOING JOB BADLY / BREAKING THE LAW? Its a nonsense argument.
What would happen is that only the people that intended to be bad police would not want to the job and/or the people that were bad police (intentional or otherwise) get kicked out of the police force. Same as with every other profession. This is a fantastic outcome and we should do it immediately.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This one seems pretty reasonable - according to the article, the cops pulled him over for swerving lanes (driving unsafely on public roads in a reasonable thing to want to police), and then discovered that he was driving on a suspended license, which he admitted to (it's reasonable to have a system for suspending peoples' drivers licenses that is enforced by the police). The police find the pill bottle and don't beli…
If a field drug test can confuse an irritable bowel syndrome drug for fentanyl or cocaine, it is not reliable enough to be used for law enforcement purposes. The same applies to facial recognition tech. We need real information on the false positive vs false negative rates for tech that purports to establish identity or criminality.
It's an unfortunate story because it sounds like he was having relapse trouble, and the cops were predisposed to do the worst to him that they could (mis)justify, when he needed to cool off and then get back to the professionals helping him with recovery.
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…
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.
It's absolutely absurd. The argument that AI is the problem is literally the people arguing against AI shedding responsibility to the machines. The people arguing that AI is the problem are essentially (philosophically) the same people who will say it was the AIs fault.
The thing that it most reminds me of is people trying to stop the deaths and injuries that come as a result of "swatting" by being really angry at people who "swat" and proposing the harshest punishment for it that they can come up with (or outdoes anyone else in the thread.)
The problem with swatting is that police were showing up to the houses of harmless people based on anonymous phone tips and murdering them. You guarantee swatting will work indefinitely when you indemnify the cops.
You don't need AI for injustice in the US justice system. There is literally no part of the US justice system that makes sense at all, and even in the best case scenario when the guilty are caught, tried, and punished, it is tremendously wasteful, cruel, and ass-backwards. Juries are basically the AI of the US justice system, allowing the prosecutorial and enforcement apparatus to be infinitely cruel, illogical, self-serving and incompetent. 12xFull AGI. AI couldn't do any worse.
> I feel like I'm going crazy with this narrative.
You're not alone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But you can in fact argue exactly that. If (arbitrary example) pedestrians are being killed due to poor road engineering practices it isn't reasonable to point at cars and say "see those are the root problem" when in fact it's due to a willful lack of sidewalks or marked crossings or whatever. Being adjacent to something bad doesn't equate to being the root cause.
History shows the timeline of dependence here. Before the introduction of cars, “poor road engineering practices” wouldn’t result in those deaths. So clearly it’s cars that are necessitating sidewalks, etc. Same deal here, if something “becomes a problem” because of the introduction of AI, it’s AI that is the root case of the resulting issues. Many people are tempted to argue that flawed humans can’t implement the pe…
Death by adverse horse encounter was very common before the 1920s. Not sure how many of those deaths can be blamed on poor quality road engineering. But putting a bunch of humans, carts, and excitable half-ton animals in the same crowded streets seems like poor engineering practice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
History shows the timeline of dependence here. Before the introduction of cars, “poor road engineering practices” wouldn’t result in those deaths. So clearly it’s cars that are necessitating sidewalks, etc. Same deal here, if something “becomes a problem” because of the introduction of AI, it’s AI that is the root case of the resulting issues. Many people are tempted to argue that flawed humans can’t implement the pe…
> Before the introduction of cars, “poor road engineering practices” wouldn’t result in those deaths. Death by adverse horse encounter was very common before the 1920s. Not sure how many of those deaths can be blamed on poor quality road engineering . But putting a bunch of humans, carts, and excitable half-ton animals in the same crowded streets seems like poor engineering practice.
After vast improvements in safety ~1.3% of American deaths are still coming from automobile accidents. Horses were never close to that, meanwhile back in 1970 cars where around twice as likely to kill you.
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.
That shouldn't be taxpayers. That should come from the malpractice insurance, similarly how doctors pay. After a while, when premiums shoot up, they'd start to behave
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Before the introduction of cars, “poor road engineering practices” wouldn’t result in those deaths. Death by adverse horse encounter was very common before the 1920s. Not sure how many of those deaths can be blamed on poor quality road engineering . But putting a bunch of humans, carts, and excitable half-ton animals in the same crowded streets seems like poor engineering practice.
very common here is a gross exaggeration compared to cars. After vast improvements in safety ~1.3% of American deaths are still coming from automobile accidents. Horses were never close to that, meanwhile back in 1970 cars where around twice as likely to kill you.
https://horse-canada.com/horses-and-history/the-poo-conferen...