Today! A great example of how 💩 x 💩 = 💩 💩 rather than 💩 x 💩 = 💰(whatever banners trying to sell you collateralised debt obligations may try and tell you).
Todays signal looks at how by combining facial inference from DNA results with facial recognition software to find cold case suspects, police departments are not just living out sci-fi fantasy, they are also multiplying result risk and *reducing* their predictive power. A machine sequence that combines imperfect (even if individually plausible) results multiplies risk of error rather than reducing it.
Ie: you cannot use more technologicsl assumptions to fix technological assumptions.
The most complex process is unlikely to produce the most accurate results.
The moral? We cannot replace judgement with imperfect weapons of “math destruction” and expect anything other that, well, that.
Anyway - how do you feel about a rule by code assumption future?
Where are you using tech tools to paper over uncertainty - to convince yourself that there is a compete answer without complete information - in your decision making processes?
Let me know (I have some ideas on how “personal foresight mastery” can help you overcome fear of uncertainty… enquire within)
Read more :
Probability policing : https://www.wired.com/story/parabon-nanolabs-dna-face-models-police-facial-recognition/
Truth machines and other lies : https://whatthefuturenow.com/2021/12/01/the-truth-machine/
Let’s get personal : https://fluxtrends.com/become-your-own-futurist-with-flux/
Compounding mistakes