SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the if-you-have-nothing-to-hide-y—oh-wait dept.
Facial recognition linked to a second wrongful arrest by Detroit police:
A false facial recognition match has led to the arrest of another innocent person. According to the Detroit Free Press, police in the city arrested a man for allegedly reaching into a person's car, taking their phone and throwing it, breaking the case and damaging the screen in the process.
Facial recognition flagged Michael Oliver as a possible suspect, and the victim identified him in a photo lineup as the person who damaged their phone. Oliver was charged with a felony count of larceny over the May 2019 incident. He said he didn't commit the crime and the evidence supported his claim.
The perpetrator, who was recorded in footage captured on a phone, doesn't look like Oliver. For one thing, he has tattoos on his arms, and there aren't any visible on the person in the video. When Oliver's attorney took photos of him to the victim and an assistant prosecutor, they agreed Oliver had been misidentified. A judge later dismissed the case.
[...] Late last month, Detroit Police Chief James Craig suggested the technology the department uses, which was created by DataWorks Plus, isn't always reliable. "If we were just to use the technology by itself, to identify someone, I would say 96 percent of the time it would misidentify," he said in a public meeting, according to Motherboard. From the start of the year through June 22nd, the force used the software 70 times per the department's public data. In all but two of those cases, the person whose image the technology analyzed was Black.
(Score: 1, Troll) by c0lo on Friday July 17 2020, @04:04AM (5 children)
Do I hear an undercurrent of "or else..." here?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday July 17 2020, @04:11AM (2 children)
You should get your ears checked. There is definitely an undercurrent of "This is preposterous, how stupid can lawmen be?" I hope you read the rest of the post. Even a not very observant half blind old man picked out multiple dissimilarities in just seconds.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday July 17 2020, @04:23AM
Not gonna make any difference.
I thought it's safer to ask than rely on my ears.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday July 17 2020, @04:39PM
I take your meaning.
The problem is that you are assuming police can NOT possibly be that stupid. Not a safe assumption.
Other people think the question itself makes no sense, there might be no lower limit. Like asking: how small can one over x get as x approaches infinity?
Stupidity might not even be relevant. It may be racism that decides a police action rather than stupidity. (Although it could be argued racism and stupidity are interrelated.)
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by FatPhil on Friday July 17 2020, @10:51AM (1 child)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday July 17 2020, @10:58AM
On Mondays, yes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford