Even putting aside from the inevitable "misuse", I even wonder about it's intended use. For example: >Jetson can achieve over 95% accuracy under good condition

Even putting aside from the inevitable "misuse", I even wonder about it's intended use. For example: >Jetson can achieve over 95% accuracy under good conditions What does this even mean? I can see enormous incentive to avoid false negatives. But I don't see as much incentive to avoid false positives. For example, the incentives are even less than for drug testing for which there is some semblance of legal proceeding. And yet which are still flawed. I'm sure it's better than bombing indiscriminately. But it'd be nice to be confident that it isn't going to increase wrongful assassinations due to over confidence. Did the test you saw attempt to show a low false positive rate too?