This is such a tired story already. Realistically AI could be tremendously helpful but its just almost always abused this way. You can't just prosecute someone because they look like the suspect. You need hard evidence.
Exactly. Could be useful for confirming the person. Like "we found this this and this and the scene, and we believe to to be x person" AI can confirm some of that like "its a 80% match" and so they can say good, we think we're arresting the right person.
It should NEVER EVER be used as the sole reasoning. But lazy incompetence cops will of course use it that way, which is why it should be banned from them. I do not trust that "a few bad apples" will avoid using it.
4 Comments
artyom@piefed.social · 8 pts · 144d
This is such a tired story already. Realistically AI could be tremendously helpful but its just almost always abused this way. You can't just prosecute someone because they look like the suspect. You need hard evidence.
AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 144d
This sounds like it requires some work.
scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech · 1 pts · 143d
Exactly. Could be useful for confirming the person. Like "we found this this and this and the scene, and we believe to to be x person" AI can confirm some of that like "its a 80% match" and so they can say good, we think we're arresting the right person.
It should NEVER EVER be used as the sole reasoning. But lazy incompetence cops will of course use it that way, which is why it should be banned from them. I do not trust that "a few bad apples" will avoid using it.
teft@piefed.social · 4 pts · 143d
And she’ll probably get nothing for her misery since they’ll claim qualified immunity.