>Trying to quantify the risk of a system as high because it only takes four steps on a single flowchart released through the FOIA is vacuous. Did we read the s

>Trying to quantify the risk of a system as high because it only takes four steps on a single flowchart released through the FOIA is vacuous. Did we read the same article?! I suppose you're right, though; despite the headline, they barely touched on the fact that it was an enormous megacorp running the black-box probable-cause generator. Your sneering dismissal of the rest of it is, I think, misplaced. I found the article to be more about quotes like this: >"The Department of Homeland Security refuses to disclose to the public how exactly ATLAS works or what rules it uses to determine when an immigrant should be flagged to potentially have their citizenship revoked. This secrecy makes it nearly impossible to tell whether ATLAS is targeting immigrants baselessly or not. The Open Society Justice Initiative this week filed a new FOIA request with DHS and its United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, or USCIS, division seeking details on how the algorithm functions." or this: >"Denaturalization experts say that putting an immigrant’s paper trail through the algorithmic wringer can lead to automated punitive measures based not on that immigrant’s past conduct but the government’s own incompetence. Experts have long pointed out that using matches against shoddily maintained fingerprints, many collected on notecards decades ago, as evidence of deliberate “fraud” or malfeasance is likely to ensnare and punish innocent people." I think the risk they're trying to emphasize is that of automation of probable-cause generation. Old or inaccurate records or fingerprints, combined with a closed-source algorithm, seems like a neat way to create firing solutions for ICE, and should the perp be an unsuitable target, ATLAS provides a neat way to obscure the kind of legal blame that might result in a lawsuit.