undefined | Better HN

0 pointsbb882y ago0 comments

There's not really any need.

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.

0 comments

benwad2y ago

The whole point of those peoples' jobs is to do due diligence. If they're blindly trusting the next person/machine down the line then they're abdicating their responsibility.

romwell2y ago

>There's not really any need.

No, there is a need.

We know what happened and why.

We also need to know who all these people were, because all of them failed at their jobs.

The last person in the chain using a shitty tool doesn't excuse anyone else. The store employee could've consulted astrological charts FFS, the use astrology wouldn't be the problem in this scenario.

neilv2y ago

People must be seeing different reporting than I am.

Because otherwise it looks like some people are reacting to a headline and a vague statement (possibly morphed through the telephone game of reporting) claiming how one piece of how the outcome happened, and are ready to extrapolate from that, and be judge, jury, and executioner.

Which would seem ironic: making much the same error themselves that they believe they're correcting in someone else.

true_religion2y ago

I feel like the software did its job.

It reported a 90% chance that this was not the suspect when asked to compare photos. Yet the company decided 10% possibility of being correct was good enough for them to report to the police that it’s definitely this guy.

neilv2y ago

How do you know all these things, about this specific case?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsbb882y ago0 comments

There's not really any need.

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.

0 comments

benwad2y ago

The whole point of those peoples' jobs is to do due diligence. If they're blindly trusting the next person/machine down the line then they're abdicating their responsibility.

romwell2y ago

>There's not really any need.

No, there is a need.

We know what happened and why.

We also need to know who all these people were, because all of them failed at their jobs.

neilv2y ago

People must be seeing different reporting than I am.

Which would seem ironic: making much the same error themselves that they believe they're correcting in someone else.

true_religion2y ago

I feel like the software did its job.

neilv2y ago

How do you know all these things, about this specific case?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse