For one, the lobbyists and pro-tech groups that are against the ban, have nothing to say about what happens when the tech is wrong. They're painting a perfect world where the tech is solid and used for things like identifying missing children.
The podcast describes the high level of false positives in the algorithms. They say "top performing" algorithms are pretty good, but generally speaking ... no. Not good.
And there's the implementation. How does this get rolled out? Who's responsible for breaches? Who can access the data? Will anyone be able to sell access to the data?
But I always come back to: what happens when it's wrong? And I don't expect perfection. KNOWING that this tech is flawed, it's important to ask "what level of flawed is acceptable?"
This is an extremely concerning point, and one that a lot of people (myself included) wouldn't even think about. If you search for "dmv" on this site, there are several posts within the last year about DMVs all over the country selling personal info. I really doubt police departments wouldn't do the same with this data.
For one, the lobbyists and pro-tech groups that are against the ban, have nothing to say about what happens when the tech is wrong. They're painting a perfect world where the tech is solid and used for things like identifying missing children.
The podcast describes the high level of false positives in the algorithms. They say "top performing" algorithms are pretty good, but generally speaking ... no. Not good.
And there's the implementation. How does this get rolled out? Who's responsible for breaches? Who can access the data? Will anyone be able to sell access to the data?
But I always come back to: what happens when it's wrong? And I don't expect perfection. KNOWING that this tech is flawed, it's important to ask "what level of flawed is acceptable?"