This kind of gets solved through the courts "Oh, you used an AI to establish probable cause?" "Yes, your honor" "Can you actually explain what happened?" "W

This kind of gets solved through the courts "Oh, you used an AI to establish probable cause?" "Yes, your honor" "Can you actually explain what happened?" "We give it a bunch of data and that makes a neural network and then it gives us answers" "OK... so basically you do not know the source of PC? This is the same has having no probable cause. Illegal search" There's something fascinating about how most AIs work. It's almost impossible (for the learning, neural network-y type) to breakdown what the "thought process" was for a result. Seemingly unimportant details because the main thought process for the AI (even if the correlation is spurious). I'm almost surprised that Google can implement any court ruling, considering how their search must be based so much on data fed to a big system.