Deep@mander.xyz to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 3 days agoGuilty until proven innocent: shoppers falsely identified by facial recognition system struggle to clear their nameswww.theguardian.comexternal-linkmessage-square37linkfedilinkarrow-up1446arrow-down14file-text
arrow-up1442arrow-down1external-linkGuilty until proven innocent: shoppers falsely identified by facial recognition system struggle to clear their nameswww.theguardian.comDeep@mander.xyz to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 3 days agomessage-square37linkfedilinkfile-text
People shamed and ordered to leave shops after being misidentified then ‘given no help’ to investigate verdicts
minus-squaredeathbird@mander.xyzlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up15·3 days agoFunny how even the things “AI” is okay at (pattern matching within a certain margin of error) still can’t be used properly.
minus-squareEnsign_Crab@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up11·3 days agoThose using it don’t care if they get false positives, so it’s working as far as they’re concerned.
minus-squaredeathbird@mander.xyzlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·2 days agoTo them it’s more trouble to actually double check or review hits then to just give people a blanket ban if they might could possibly be shoplifters.
minus-squaredeathbird@mander.xyzlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 days agoYeah someone was explaining how false positives specifically within the context of early markers of pancreatic cancer are actually not much of a concern.
Funny how even the things “AI” is okay at (pattern matching within a certain margin of error) still can’t be used properly.
Those using it don’t care if they get false positives, so it’s working as far as they’re concerned.
To them it’s more trouble to actually double check or review hits then to just give people a blanket ban if they might could possibly be shoplifters.
Yeah someone was explaining how false positives specifically within the context of early markers of pancreatic cancer are actually not much of a concern.