4 ms·

I would be shocked if LE started using this tech, imprisoned a bunch of people, and used the excuse "Well, we followed the FAQS." I would imagine they would wor

I would be shocked if LE started using this tech, imprisoned a bunch of people, and used the excuse "Well, we followed the FAQS." I would imagine they would work very closely with Amazon and run a ton of calibration. For the ACLU to say that we used the default settings and it doesn't work correctly is disingenuous.

EliRivers 8y ago
I would imagine they would work very closely with Amazon and run a ton of calibration. Do you have any evidence for this? I would have imagined the other way; that it would be badly deployed by ill-trained gung-ho operators who will routinely end up clubbing some innocent guy round the head (if they don't just shoot him) because the magic machine said he was a dangerous killer on the loose. I don't have any evidence my way, but what I imagined is the polar opposite of what you imagined.
Jweb_Guru 8y ago
Assuming that law enforcement is going to spend any amount of time being careful about enforcing correct use of forensic tools is hard to reconcile with the history of the American judicial system. For example, there is essentially no scientific evidence that a polygraph test measures anything at all, but polygraph evidence is considered admissible in many courts and used to be admitted in many more. Moreover, rigorous studies of fingerprint evidence have found them to have false positive rates as high as 1 in 18, but they are still often treated as close to infallible in court. I am not sure why you think facial recognition is going to be different.
delecti 8y ago
I would not be shocked at all if some LE somewhere used the default settings. It seems absurd to assume otherwise. It's not as though LE has a great track record. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List#False_positives https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List#False_positives
- ocfx 8y ago
  LE won't be given "settings"
philipodonnell 8y ago
You are going to be very very shocked my friend!
spamizbad 8y ago
LE doesn't have the best track record following best practices. For example, they still rely heavily on notoriously unreliable eye-witness accounts and polygraph tests, two things science has largely debunked. They were slow to let go of phrenology as well.

EliRivers 8y ago

I would imagine they would work very closely with Amazon and run a ton of calibration. Do you have any evidence for this? I would have imagined the other way; that it would be badly deployed by ill-trained gung-ho operators who will routinely end up clubbing some innocent guy round the head (if they don't just shoot him) because the magic machine said he was a dangerous killer on the loose. I don't have any evidence my way, but what I imagined is the polar opposite of what you imagined.

Jweb_Guru 8y ago

Assuming that law enforcement is going to spend any amount of time being careful about enforcing correct use of forensic tools is hard to reconcile with the history of the American judicial system. For example, there is essentially no scientific evidence that a polygraph test measures anything at all, but polygraph evidence is considered admissible in many courts and used to be admitted in many more. Moreover, rigorous studies of fingerprint evidence have found them to have false positive rates as high as 1 in 18, but they are still often treated as close to infallible in court. I am not sure why you think facial recognition is going to be different.

delecti 8y ago

I would not be shocked at all if some LE somewhere used the default settings. It seems absurd to assume otherwise. It's not as though LE has a great track record. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List#False_positives https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List#False_positives

ocfx 8y ago
LE won't be given "settings"

philipodonnell 8y ago

You are going to be very very shocked my friend!

spamizbad 8y ago

LE doesn't have the best track record following best practices. For example, they still rely heavily on notoriously unreliable eye-witness accounts and polygraph tests, two things science has largely debunked. They were slow to let go of phrenology as well.