| ▲ | cortesoft 9 hours ago | |
While I don't think inaccuracy is the ONLY reason to be against a surveillance state, it is certainly a big part of why omnipresent surveillance is always going to lead to more problems than it will solve, and can be a good way to convince people of why we should not have it even if they don't agree with us on all the other reasons it is bad. This case is a perfect demonstration of the Base Rate Fallacy, and shows what happens when you surveil EVERYONE hoping to find a small percentage of bad people you want to stop. Almost every car that Flock scans is a normal, law abiding citizen. Even at very high levels of accuracy, any sort of flagging it does is going to most likely be an innocent person simply because of the Base Rate Fallacy. There are going to be a LOT more of these types of stories than there will be where they actually find a bad guy. | ||