Heater wrote: ↑
Tue Jun 19, 2018 9:38 pm
How do you check that the thing is working properly without looking at a huge sample of input images and checking how it rates them?
If you do that then you must have said images in your possession and are hence breaking the law.
This is the fundamental problem with zero tolerance and purely technical offences where one is guilty simply by way of possession with Mens Rea and all other mitigations taken out of the equation. Made worse with minimum mandated sentences.
Someone can walk past you, slip a kiddie porn image in your pocket with one hand while tapping a nearby policeman on the shoulder with the other. Tada! And you're holidaying for a few years at Her Majesty's Pleasure, no ifs or buts.
That's not justice. It should offend anyone who has any belief in justice.
When it's a guaranteed conviction if it goes to court your fate falls to whether the police pursue charges or not. You are then at the mercy of whether the cops like you or don't, which may depend on your skin colour, religion, or anything else people discriminate on. It ultimately means police are administering justice not the courts.
We see that in America where two guys may have a pipe bomb. The black Muslim will possibly end up charged with having a Weapon of Mass Destruction while a white neo-Nazi may get charged with a far less serious offence of possession of explosives.