There's also this, which I'm not sure how to interpret:
> “So, when EssilorLuxottica and Macy’s compared unclear security footage to (the man’s) mugshots from the 1980s, these companies knew that there was an error rate of almost 90%. Yet these companies told (Houston Police) with absolute certainty that they identified the person who robbed the Sunglass Hut,” the lawsuit said.
Also I'd love to know the names of the judge, prosecutor, and investigator who put a man in jail simply because a man from the store told them to.
The judge did it because the prosecution said he did.
The prosecution brought charges because the police said it was him.
The police arrested him because the corporation said it was him.
The corporation said it was him because the software said it was him.
The software said it was him because it was SHIT.
Best not to feed Internet pitchfork villagers, who have shown countless times that they're collectively dumb as snot, with no sense of process, critical thinking, nor decency.
I'd think the identities of public servants isn't really relevant at this point, but rather, what was the evidence and chronology.
As techies, we're best suited to tackle some of the evidence around tech, like what was the tech, how does it work, how was it represented, how was it used, what did it do, etc.
Is this the future we want? For many people, the answer is a clear no. But like the Luddites of generations before (who were right about everything) we are not the ones who get to decide what the future will be. Maybe there's still time to go be a potato farmer in Idaho or something.
Every square inch of the prison should be covered by cameras. Of all the new powers and fancy equipment law enforcement seeks, this should come first.
Yes, put cameras in the bathroom. It's stupid that we wring our hands over bathroom privacy in jails while rapes are so common. "You'll get raped, but at least you'll have privacy". Stupid.
More discussion last week: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39118534
