>The fact that the system also falsely negatively identified people doesn't somehow 'balance out' false positives, it's not like the point of these systems is t

>The fact that the system also falsely negatively identified people doesn't somehow 'balance out' false positives, it's not like the point of these systems is to randomly catch 100 African-Americans. If they're disproportionatly committing crimes, skin color becomes a strong prior. It would be rational, iff the goal is to lower crime rates. But I don't know that it is morally OK. Also I'm not sure if over representation is the source of bias in this particular case, haven't read the article yet. Edit: yeah, this article is just a smear, wapo is salivating over anything they think confirms that police are racially biased. It doesn't mention anything technical about the training data or typical nets being used. I'm not advocating for facial recognition tech, I'm personally against it, but racial bias coming from objective data is the least of your potential worries.