3 ms·
I think that people wind up worried about the wrong thing on these systems. The worst case scenario, where some all-knowing system negatively impacts you becaus
by Karunamon 6y ago
I think that people wind up worried about the wrong thing on these systems. The worst case scenario, where some all-knowing system negatively impacts you because it's rating your behavior on some opaque scale, isn't the one we should be worried about.
That by itself is scary enough, but the much more likely case is the one where this system is rating you based on wrong information, and given Finagle's law..
Especially concerning when the justice system starts using this info; you really, really don't want to be the false positive.
- justanotherc 6y agoThe justice system has built into it the requirement to justify allegations against you though. By design everything in the justice system is transparent or its not admissible. So an opaque "score" of any sort wouldn't ever be acceptable evidence.
- sroussey 6y agoYou are thinking in about evidence in court. Police have other data that can flag you for greater scrutiny. Then your chances of even being in court go up.
- justanotherc 6y agoBut they have to establish reasonable suspicion, wuch they also have to justify in court in order to investigate you further. They can't just say "he had a bad score, so I pulled him over and found weed". If they did that, the stop would be unjustified and the whole case would be thrown out.
- patmorgan23 6y agoPredictive policing
- inetknght 6y ago> By design everything in the justice system is transparent or its not admissible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction
- justanotherc 6y agoEvidence constructed in parallel is not admissible, therefore my point stands. So what's your point?