3 ms·

OF COURSE there will be erroneous convictions. There would be erroneous convictions even if a crime was performed right inside the courtroom, in front of a judg

OF COURSE there will be erroneous convictions. There would be erroneous convictions even if a crime was performed right inside the courtroom, in front of a judge and jury and CCV camera. I suppose using colloquial language by using universal phrases for the sake of clarity is a 'no-no' because some pedant will call you out on it. How about this: "Convictions due to facial recognition false positives are low probability outliers to the extent that they will not impact the civil rights of citizenry".. Is that better? Does that improve conversation? Should we not provide a modicum of charity in interpreting the arguments of others? BTW, you realize you undermined your point as well? DNA is an incredible forensic tool, that outweighs any outliers. If you're claiming facial recognition is or is going to be like DNA identification, you lost your argument.

isostatic 7y ago
DNA is a problem because it's presented as proof to a jury, who convict. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/a-reasonable-doubt/480747/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/a-reaso... From the beginning, Sutton and Adams denied any involvement. They both had alibis, and neither of them matched the profile from the victim’s original account: She’d described her assailants as short and skinny. Adams was 5 foot 11 and 180 pounds. Sutton was three inches taller and 25 pounds heavier, the captain of his high-school football team. The DNA evidence was harder to refute. Having seen enough prime-time TV to believe that a DNA test would vindicate them, Sutton and Adams had agreed, while in custody, to provide the police with blood samples Reality is that DNA evidence overrides actual evidence time and time again, and people are wrongfully sent to jail, have their lives ruined, and even die, because of it. The same thing will happen with facial recognition, gait, etc.

isostatic 7y ago

DNA is a problem because it's presented as proof to a jury, who convict. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/a-reasonable-doubt/480747/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/a-reaso... From the beginning, Sutton and Adams denied any involvement. They both had alibis, and neither of them matched the profile from the victim’s original account: She’d described her assailants as short and skinny. Adams was 5 foot 11 and 180 pounds. Sutton was three inches taller and 25 pounds heavier, the captain of his high-school football team. The DNA evidence was harder to refute. Having seen enough prime-time TV to believe that a DNA test would vindicate them, Sutton and Adams had agreed, while in custody, to provide the police with blood samples Reality is that DNA evidence overrides actual evidence time and time again, and people are wrongfully sent to jail, have their lives ruined, and even die, because of it. The same thing will happen with facial recognition, gait, etc.