4 ms·
If it's better than a random guess–which it is, majorly–then it could constitute a valid data point in narrowing a search. There's nothing racist about using it
by handedness 10y ago
If it's better than a random guess–which it is, majorly–then it could constitute a valid data point in narrowing a search. There's nothing racist about using it to the level of accuracy it has demonstrated. If the system worked to the same degree of accuracy on Caucasians as it does on Africans nobody would be calling it racist, they'd be calling it a tool that can help build a list of potential suspects to further investigate.
To argue anything else is making it a matter of social sensibilities.
- bilbo0s 10y agoOnly it's not better than a random guess. Because in Eyewitness identification, you're never truly dealing with "random" guesses. Again, my experience is on the medical side of this whole thing. I know, and understand, the rules as my company is obliged to play by them. And there is just no question that we would not be allowed to use that system on african americans. Review boards would look on it the same way you might look on someone using leeches in the middle ages. Only worse... because we KNOW it doesn't work.