I am comfortable saying the algorithm could be made neutral, but I expect it would be extremely difficult to feed it neutral data. Most of what we have now is already heavily skewed because of human involvement. Perhaps starting from scratch, a place of zero knowledge, with absolutely no input allowed from humans.

But even then, I would not accept following two random people around based on skin color and waiting for them to make a trivial mistake that justifies deeper investigation, regardless of what any data might say.

>I would not accept following two random people around based on skin color and waiting for them to make a trivial mistake that justifies deeper investigation

And I agree with you. But guess what a robot would do? It would follow everyone, all the time, everywhere. By being overly outraged about a small minority of racist cops (I really don't believe it's the majority) we will get something worse that will never ever be able to protest our way out of.

Sometimes, I think the answer to a problem is to accept there will always be some problems. If we continue to try and make a perfect system we end up at a wall and then irrationality pushes us into a bad place, worse than what we had before.

> But if it was a robot, it wouldn't be racist or appalling, but it seems to be that if a human does it is considered racist.

Where is this said?

To quote the movie Short Circuit "Robots don't think, they just run programs".

If the software is racist, then the robot is, if the software is not racist, neither is the robot.

Therefore, robots cannot be racist. Only programmers can be racist. (which are people)

No, it's still racist if it is discriminatory in effect.

> Recording faces and license plates and reporting on data found can't be racist, it is purely

The use of Hollerith machines in processing census data to feed the Nazi extermination program was definitely racist.