4 ms·

For Americans wondering what this is all about, this 4 part series captures what happened well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr_Bates_vs_The_Post_Office https:

For Americans wondering what this is all about, this 4 part series captures what happened well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr_Bates_vs_The_Post_Office https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr_Bates_vs_The_Post_Office

graemep 1y ago
its great that exists and that it got attention. Its an immense problem that it got so little attention until someone made a TV dramatisation of it. There are definitely many other miscarriages of justice caused by the assumption that systems are always correct, and these are not being corrected. The lack of consequences for those responsible also means there is no deterrent to others doing similar things.
- tajd 1y ago
  I think hopefully it raises that awareness that these systems are imperfect and do not allow people to delegate their decision making totally. I'm afraid rise of AI and the increase in more plausible sounding yet incorrect behaviours won't help us there. We should use this as an instructive example on how we can built more transparent/useful systems for all of our users.
  - chrisjj 1y ago
    > these systems are imperfect and do not allow people to delegate their decision making totally There's no evidence this scandal arose from software allowing any delegation of decisions.
    - tajd 1y ago
      Ah ok, potentially I was imprecise - the post office leadership appeared to assume that the software was completely correct. That is what I was trying to frame as "systems are imperfect and people should take care to validate what they are doing"
      - chrisjj 1y ago
        Thanks for the clarification. Yes, any system at fault here looks more likely to be corporate than computer. The criminal prosecution will hopefully determine the extent to which the leadership did genuinely make that assumption.
      - jemmyw 1y ago
        > the post office leadership appeared to assume that the software was completely correct Not even that. The leadership appeared to not care or care to understand what was going on. They showed a lack of competence and tried to cover it up, badly, when they realized they might be in deep shit. The software was just one part, and really just further wrapped up in leadership failure.

graemep 1y ago

its great that exists and that it got attention. Its an immense problem that it got so little attention until someone made a TV dramatisation of it. There are definitely many other miscarriages of justice caused by the assumption that systems are always correct, and these are not being corrected. The lack of consequences for those responsible also means there is no deterrent to others doing similar things.

tajd 1y ago
I think hopefully it raises that awareness that these systems are imperfect and do not allow people to delegate their decision making totally. I'm afraid rise of AI and the increase in more plausible sounding yet incorrect behaviours won't help us there. We should use this as an instructive example on how we can built more transparent/useful systems for all of our users.
- chrisjj 1y ago
  > these systems are imperfect and do not allow people to delegate their decision making totally There's no evidence this scandal arose from software allowing any delegation of decisions.
  - tajd 1y ago
    Ah ok, potentially I was imprecise - the post office leadership appeared to assume that the software was completely correct. That is what I was trying to frame as "systems are imperfect and people should take care to validate what they are doing"
    - chrisjj 1y ago
      Thanks for the clarification. Yes, any system at fault here looks more likely to be corporate than computer. The criminal prosecution will hopefully determine the extent to which the leadership did genuinely make that assumption.
    - jemmyw 1y ago
      > the post office leadership appeared to assume that the software was completely correct Not even that. The leadership appeared to not care or care to understand what was going on. They showed a lack of competence and tried to cover it up, badly, when they realized they might be in deep shit. The software was just one part, and really just further wrapped up in leadership failure.