The idea that any policing algorithms will by definition be open and auditable and whatnot is a lovely one. I would welcome that. We already have some situatio

The idea that any policing algorithms will by definition be open and auditable and whatnot is a lovely one. I would welcome that. We already have some situations where algorithms are used in policing. Like for breathalyzers. The code is not open source. The audit chain is not inspectable. To say that new algorithms will be held to higher standards because you want them to be is laudable. But it seems like you might be engaging in magical thinking. If you could make a strong argument why the system will use new algorithms differently than the existing ones, I'd love to hear them. But remember, the incentives for the people who allowed closed source breathalyzers, closed source voting machines, etc haven't changed yet. If their incentives need to change in order for us to get open, auditable algorithms, that's going to have to happen before we start using them, not after.