3 ms·
Yeah, there need to be consequences for this. The alternative is empowering people and corporations to destroy lives with impunity in pursuit of their own goals
by caconym_ 6y ago
Yeah, there need to be consequences for this. The alternative is empowering people and corporations to destroy lives with impunity in pursuit of their own goals, as long as they can later claim it wasn’t intentional.
What really pisses me off is how we fail again and again to ask the question of whether these entities should have been doing what they were doing in the first place, if it even can be done safely. Facebook, Equifax, police surveillance and misconduct, totally unaccountable “forensics” techniques—in all these cases where incalculable damage is done in totally predictable ways, we only address it reactively (if we address it at all) and completely fail to fix or even really consider the root cause(s). It’s like we have this huge blind spot where we take as a given that established entities doing thing(s) just have a right to keep doing them, regardless of any other factors.
In this case, forensics “experts” (essentially witch doctors) and fly-by-night black-box “labs” with unproven methodologies an undergrad intern might have developed in a week or two are institutionalized in our courts. This has happened because there is zero oversight and zero accountability for their claims, and lives are destroyed as a result.
It is insane not to pursue criminal charges for these indiscriminate arsonists of justice—if they can’t do what they claim to do fairly and accurately, they should not do it. They don’t have a right to “try” just because it will make them money, regardless of the consequences.
- tsimionescu 6y agoA lot of people respond to this as if the fact that it would be nice if forensics worked justifies treating them as if they do. 'What do you want them to do, stop looking for fingerprints and DNA evidence?' Yes! Just like I don't want them to use 'lie detectors' or hire psychics.
- caconym_ 6y agoExactly! It’s pure wishful thinking, and in a lot of cases those wishes are (at best) frighteningly amoral in context. It’s like a hack to get around the whole “reasonable doubt” thing: just sequester all that pesky doubt in a black box so that people can’t see it, and if anyone asks just play dumb.