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

Armed police swarm student after AI mistakes bag of Doritos for a weapon

dexerto.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 468 posts

Re: Armed police swarm student after AI mistakes bag of Doritos for a weapon

#451

Post by potato3732842 »

Aeolun wrote: post #271
coryrc wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the good ones ... uh-huh > if they don't the outcome is on them personally and potentially legally. Bullshit, they're rarely held accountable when they straight up murder people, and even then "accountable" is "have to go get a different job". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_John_T._Williams ACAB

It seems entirely in line to not be held accountable for terrorizing/murdering people when you are held accountable for doing the opposite? It just means the police force is an instrument of terror.

>It just means the police force is an instrument of terror.

always had been dot jpeg.

Re: Armed police swarm student after AI mistakes bag of Doritos for a weapon

#452

Post by zugi »

plorg wrote: post #349
zugi wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. In a saner world, we could use fallible AI to call attention to possible concerns that a human could then analyze and make an appropriate judgment call on. But alas, we don't live in that world. We live in a world where there will be firings, civil, and even criminal liability for those who make wrong judgments. If the AI says "possible gun", the human running things who alerts a SWAT team faces all upside a…

I can't say that I think it would be a saner world to have the equivalent of a teacher or hall monitor sitting in on every conversation, even if that computer chaperone isn't going to automatically involve the cops. I don't think you can build a better society where everyone is expected to speak and behave defensively in every circumstance as if their words could be taken out of context by a snitch - computer or othe…

Absolutely agree, constant surveillance is something we have too much of already.

My thought when posting was, if the schools already have surveillance cameras that human security guards are watching, adding an AI to alert them to items of interest alone wasn't bad. But maybe you've changed my mind. The AI pays more invasive attention to every stream. Whereas a guard may be watching 16 feeds at once and barely be paying attention, and no one may ever even view the feed unless a crime occurs and they go looking for evidence.

Regardless this setup was way worse! The article said the AI:

> ... scans existing surveillance footage and alerts police in real time when it detects what it believes to be a weapon.

Wow, the system was designed with no human in the loop - it automatically summons armed police!

Re: Armed police swarm student after AI mistakes bag of Doritos for a weapon

#453

Post by Ancapistani »

ivell wrote: post #355
coryrc wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Far more deaths by automobile than homicides by guns.

Guns are actually easier to control and significantly reduce ability to target multiple people at once. There are a lot of countries successfully controlling guns. To the argument that then only criminals have guns - in India at least, criminals have very limited access to guns. They have to resort to unreliable handmade guns which are difficult to procure. Usually criminals use knives and swords due to that.

> Guns are actually easier to control

This would not be the case in the US.

Re: Armed police swarm student after AI mistakes bag of Doritos for a weapon

#454

Post by GuinansEyebrows »

parineum wrote: post #447
GuinansEyebrows wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Since corporations aren't people, Boeing didn't know anything. you have to recognize that a statement like this means that decision-makers at boeing either knew or were negligent in their duties .

Which is a hell of a thing to say without evidence.

i can’t think of another option without giving them more credit than they deserve.

Re: Armed police swarm student after AI mistakes bag of Doritos for a weapon

#455

Post by Ancapistani »

ggreer wrote: post #291
aidenn0 wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds to me like it's pretty close to the middle of the curve a large High School in the US.

I doubt that. I moved around a lot as a kid, so I went to at least eight different public schools from Alabama to Washington. One school was structurally condemned while I attended it. Some places had bullying, and sometimes a couple of people fought, but never with weapons, and there was never an injury severe enough to require medical attention. I also know several high school teachers and the worst things they've…

I went to a very small rural school, and remember the big deal made when the administration asked the seniors to take their rifles out of the rear windows while on school property.

There were fights, but no one was ever harmed with a weapon to my memory.

Re: Armed police swarm student after AI mistakes bag of Doritos for a weapon

#456

Post by b00ty4breakfast »

perplex3d wrote: post #239
chillingeffect wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The invention of the corporation is virtually to eliminate responsibility/culpability from any individual. Human car crash? Human punishment. Corporate-owned car crash? A fine which reduces salaries some negligible percent.

Yes, corporations have all of the rights of a person, abilities beyond a person, yet few of the responsibilities of a person.

I remember reading a quote from someone to the effect of "I'll support corporate personhood after I see Texas execute a corporation". I'm definitely misremembering but you get the sentiment, haha

Re: Armed police swarm student after AI mistakes bag of Doritos for a weapon

#457

Post by spwa4 »

dogleash wrote: post #419
zugi wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. In a saner world, we could use fallible AI to call attention to possible concerns that a human could then analyze and make an appropriate judgment call on. But alas, we don't live in that world. We live in a world where there will be firings, civil, and even criminal liability for those who make wrong judgments. If the AI says "possible gun", the human running things who alerts a SWAT team faces all upside a…

>we could use fallible AI to call attention to possible concerns that a human could then analyze and make an appropriate judgment call on That "we could" is doing some very heavy lifting. But even if we pretend it's remotely feasible, do we want to take an institution that already trains submission to authority and use it to normalize ubiquitous "for your own good" surveillance?

Not to mention that the human in question can either accept responsibility for letting a weapon into a school, or "pass that liability on to the police". What do you think they'll do?

Re: Armed police swarm student after AI mistakes bag of Doritos for a weapon

#458

Post by akimbostrawman »

vee-kay wrote: post #406
akimbostrawman wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of your examples are well known not because its normal and accepted but because they are exceptions. For every one bad example there are thousand good ones, that's humans for you. Doesn't mean they are perfect or shouldn't criticised but claiming that's all they are doing isn't reasonable either. If you look at actual per capita statistics you will easily see this.

The statistics are indeed quite telling.. and chilling! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_killings_by_law_enfor... In the United States, law enforcement officers shoot and kill more than 1,100 civilians each year, with a significant number of these incidents involving unarmed individuals, particularly among Black Americans who are disproportionately affected. The FBI has begun collecting data on these use-of-for…

>incidents involving unarmed individuals,

Someone being unarmed doesn't mean they can't be deadly. They could be driving a vehicle or otherwise physically assault somebody which would justify deadly force.

Otherwise 1100 is actually quite low compared to the total gun death and per capita in which blacks are over represented compared to all other groups. That includes black on black and black on cops.

Re: Armed police swarm student after AI mistakes bag of Doritos for a weapon

#459

Post by spwa4 »

grafmax wrote: post #302
zugi wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. In a saner world, we could use fallible AI to call attention to possible concerns that a human could then analyze and make an appropriate judgment call on. But alas, we don't live in that world. We live in a world where there will be firings, civil, and even criminal liability for those who make wrong judgments. If the AI says "possible gun", the human running things who alerts a SWAT team faces all upside a…

At least the current moment, the increasing turn to using autonomous weaponry against one’s citizens - I don’t think it says so much about humanity so much as the US. I think US foreign policy is a disaster but turning the AI-powered military against the citizenry does look like it’s going to be quite successful, presumably because the US leadership is fighting an enemy incapable of defending itself. I think it’s uns…

Actually China is far further along in "turning autonomous weaponry against one's citizens" than the US is. Ubiquitous surveillance and "social credit score" have been expanding in China since the early 2000s.

In fact one might say that what the communist parties did in the 1910s was pretty much that. Ubiquitous surveillance is the problem here, not AI. Communist states used tens of thousands of "agents" that would just walk around, listen in to random conversations, and arrest (and later torture and deport) people. Of course communist states that still exist, like China, have started using AI to do this, but it is nothing new for China and it's people.

And, of course, what these communist states are doing is protecting the rich and powerful in society, and enforcing their "vision", using far more oppressive means than even the GOP dares to dream about. Including against "socialist causes", like LGBTQ. For starters, using state violence against people for merely talking about problems, for example.

Re: Armed police swarm student after AI mistakes bag of Doritos for a weapon

#460

Post by grafmax »

spwa4 wrote: post #459
grafmax wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least the current moment, the increasing turn to using autonomous weaponry against one’s citizens - I don’t think it says so much about humanity so much as the US. I think US foreign policy is a disaster but turning the AI-powered military against the citizenry does look like it’s going to be quite successful, presumably because the US leadership is fighting an enemy incapable of defending itself. I think it’s uns…

Actually China is far further along in "turning autonomous weaponry against one's citizens" than the US is. Ubiquitous surveillance and "social credit score" have been expanding in China since the early 2000s. In fact one might say that what the communist parties did in the 1910s was pretty much that. Ubiquitous surveillance is the problem here, not AI. Communist states used tens of thousands of "agents" that would j…

But a false dichotomy isn’t it? Authoritarian communist vs techno-fascist?

> far more oppressive means than even the GOP dares to dream about

That seems to be exactly what they are dreaming about. Something like China’s authoritarianism minus the wise stewardship of the economy, plus killer drones,

Post reply on HN