And more recently, UK police have discovered that surveilling crowds with facial recognition software produces almost entirely false positives, even if the software is supposedly quite accurate at picking out criminals. Not that they care or plan to stop using it, of course.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/05/uk-police-say-92...

All you're saying is that any Muslim picked up is more likely to not be a criminal, which seems expected. The problem with "strong sampling", is, perhaps obviously, that they focus too strongly on the 'brown skinned people' and therefore might miss other criminals. The article you link seems to suggest some profiling is good, but that strong profiling AND random sampling are equally inefficient.

"A mathematically optimal strategy would be 'square-root biased sampling,' the geometric mean between strong profiling and uniform sampling, with secondary screenings distributed broadly, although not uniformly, over the population."

The Sam Harris article referenced, for anyone else who was unfamiliar with the controversy: https://samharris.org/in-defense-of-profiling/

Just wow.