• Pips@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 month ago

    There’s a Pardon Office at the DOJ that normally handles vetting and recommending pardons. Realistically, there’s no way to do it apolitically. Everyone has a political bias, which will be reflected in the recommendations.

    • theangryseal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s a bummer that we can’t be more apolitical. I mean, I know it’s doable. It would be hard to vet people, but probably doable.

      Maybe AI will be of some use to humanity and will be fed case data one day and then it can bring the odd ones to the top.

      Who knows? Not me, I’m just an idiot.

      • Pips@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        AI is inherently biased by the input. It’s glorified analytics and predictive text/pixel software that relies on existing data. So what’s best is what we’re doing. It would just as likely recommend more executions.

        • theangryseal@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I mean, maybe it could analyze data and show where people have been convicted with no evidence so that humans wouldn’t have to go digging for it.

          I don’t know. I don’t know anything about it really.

          • Pips@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            Everyone is convicted with some evidence. The problem for a lot of these actual innocence cases is the evidence is either not actually very compelling or made up. For example, a shitty eyewitness saying they saw the defendant do it is still evidence, even if it turns out they’re wrong.