> a spokesman said that the department never relied on it alone to make an arrest, and that the victim’s identification of Mr. Williams provided the evidence to charge him.
As a layman, it looks to me like the legal system is unprepared for the unintuitive issue that if you run a facial recognition search with a 0.000001 false positive rate on a database 10 million people, you get someone who:
1. Likely looks extremely close to the target
2. Has a 99% chance of not actually being the target
Eyewitness confirmation does little to shift that 99% because it'll be based largely on the same factors, rather than being independent evidence.
duxup · 54m ago
“Computer said you did it.” situations seem ripe for abuse and failure.
Even scarier with the black box that is AI…
How can I refute what a computer says if nobody knows how it came to a conclusion?
As a layman, it looks to me like the legal system is unprepared for the unintuitive issue that if you run a facial recognition search with a 0.000001 false positive rate on a database 10 million people, you get someone who:
1. Likely looks extremely close to the target
2. Has a 99% chance of not actually being the target
Eyewitness confirmation does little to shift that 99% because it'll be based largely on the same factors, rather than being independent evidence.
Even scarier with the black box that is AI…
How can I refute what a computer says if nobody knows how it came to a conclusion?