3 ms·

No, it's explicit in my post. A facial recognition system cannot be designed to function well. A logical view says that anything short of perfect will absolutel

No, it's explicit in my post. A facial recognition system cannot be designed to function well. A logical view says that anything short of perfect will absolutely ruin people's lives.

throwawaysea 6y ago
No, it will improve society overall because it will lead to significantly higher accountability and consequences for criminals who are caught. There is no logic or evidence to your claim that “anything short of perfect will absolutely ruin people's lives”. We already live in an imperfect world. It will never be perfect. Facial recognition with humans in the loop will lead to a far higher ratio of bad people facing consequences to good people incorrectly identified. It is a net improvement for society and it is much more reasonable to claim it will “absolutely improve people’s lives”.
- Pfhreak 6y ago
  There is absolutely logic in it. If you get falsely arrested (not even convicted), you can lose your job, get deported, spend thousands trying to clear your name, or even just get shot by the police. AI tech will have false positives. Technology that allows officers to screen many many people at scale will result in false positive arrests (or police violence) that would not have happened otherwise. Therefore, this technology will ruin lives. This is clearly logical. You might be ok with that cost, I'm not. But that's a different line of debate. I believe the idea that it is a net improvement is the idea that is unbelievable and unfounded given the current trends in AI. What gives you confidence?
  - throwawaysea 6y ago
    Again there is a human in the loop to validate a potential match, before officers get dispatched. And if the dispatcher doesn't do it, we can easily just have the police officer responding to validate the match between the surveillance photo and a known photo of the suspect. Humans already have a false positive rate as part of existing policing procedures, and facial recognition doesn’t make the rate worse as long as it retains a human validating the AI’s match. Also, almost every state has a process to expunge arrests even IF you were convicted (of something minor). As for why I’m confident about net improvement - it’s because the amount of true positive arrests (and subsequent convictions) will be far greater than false positive arrests. Therefore relative to the status quo it’ll be a net positive of criminals facing consequences, victims being compensated or getting closure, subsequent reduction in crime through deterrence, etc.
- odessacubbage 6y ago
  what about an incorrect flagging being used as evidence in a case in order to prove that a suspect was in a given location around the time that an offense occurred? do we render the entire data set as inadmissible in court for the risk of such misclassifications? >anything short of perfect will absolutely ruin people's lives this is more or less the basis for all thought within our system of justice.

No, it's explicit in my post. A facial recognition system cannot be designed to function well. A logical view says that anything short of perfect will absolutely ruin people's lives.

throwawaysea 6y ago

No, it will improve society overall because it will lead to significantly higher accountability and consequences for criminals who are caught. There is no logic or evidence to your claim that “anything short of perfect will absolutely ruin people's lives”. We already live in an imperfect world. It will never be perfect. Facial recognition with humans in the loop will lead to a far higher ratio of bad people facing consequences to good people incorrectly identified. It is a net improvement for society and it is much more reasonable to claim it will “absolutely improve people’s lives”.

Pfhreak 6y ago
There is absolutely logic in it. If you get falsely arrested (not even convicted), you can lose your job, get deported, spend thousands trying to clear your name, or even just get shot by the police. AI tech will have false positives. Technology that allows officers to screen many many people at scale will result in false positive arrests (or police violence) that would not have happened otherwise. Therefore, this technology will ruin lives. This is clearly logical. You might be ok with that cost, I'm not. But that's a different line of debate. I believe the idea that it is a net improvement is the idea that is unbelievable and unfounded given the current trends in AI. What gives you confidence?
- throwawaysea 6y ago
  Again there is a human in the loop to validate a potential match, before officers get dispatched. And if the dispatcher doesn't do it, we can easily just have the police officer responding to validate the match between the surveillance photo and a known photo of the suspect. Humans already have a false positive rate as part of existing policing procedures, and facial recognition doesn’t make the rate worse as long as it retains a human validating the AI’s match. Also, almost every state has a process to expunge arrests even IF you were convicted (of something minor). As for why I’m confident about net improvement - it’s because the amount of true positive arrests (and subsequent convictions) will be far greater than false positive arrests. Therefore relative to the status quo it’ll be a net positive of criminals facing consequences, victims being compensated or getting closure, subsequent reduction in crime through deterrence, etc.
odessacubbage 6y ago
what about an incorrect flagging being used as evidence in a case in order to prove that a suspect was in a given location around the time that an offense occurred? do we render the entire data set as inadmissible in court for the risk of such misclassifications? >anything short of perfect will absolutely ruin people's lives this is more or less the basis for all thought within our system of justice.