Prove imprecise provenienti dallo strumento di intelligenza artificiale hanno portato la polizia a perseguire il divieto nei confronti dei tifosi di calcio israeliani, rilevano i parlamentari

[removed]

The fact they were banned is a good thing, it’s just rather baffling that the police used ai out of laziness instead of just pointing to the mountains of other evidence.

The fundamental problem with local politics in this country is that it starts from the rather naive assumption that everyone involved are good chaps motivated by evidence based policy, and engagement with them will result in positive outcomes for everyone involved.

In a world with Tommy Robinson, Restore UK, Lutfur Rahman with Aspire, George Galloway and the Gaza Independents, there is a second option now (which was always present but rarely so explicit), that the community in question has specifically chosen an aggressive, bad faith actor to represent them and lobby for their interests, and *sometimes* (not always) that interest will be plain and simple racism couched in barely coded language to give a fig leaf of plausible deniability.

I agree the immediate answer should not be to just completely dismiss their arguments, and instead to consider any ‘legitimate grievances’ that might be being expressed, but a core part of any process has to be the consideration that the local stakeholders might actually be biased and shouldn’t just immediately be accepted to be true. There needs to be an independent analysis of the actual evidence prior to the community engagement stage to determine *before the conversation* how believable the claims are.

We have paperwork and processes for a reason, and a big one is to identify systemic biases. ‘Our AI started hallucinating bad things Jews did to justify us banning them’ is a pretty worrying systematic bias.