okthenletssee

Even simpler example: you don't get paid for eating food. Does that imply food has no value?

Leisure time/spare time has value already. People work so that they can afford to have spare time and go on holidays. You have severe misconceptions about economics.

People not having to work to survive will just lead to people having kids (or migrating to places where they get free money) until society can not support them all anymore, then we will be back to zero again.

What rewarding experience has zero financial value?

I think you are very wrong about money.

The call center people use the computer to make excuses.

And you overlook the possibility of human error without computer involvement. The classical "a black person mugged me" comes to mind.

At the end of the day it is a tool. Law enforcement should be done by professionals anyway. There are a million ways to get it wrong. At least with computers, you can standardize and enforce some good practices.

The problem with issues like the ones you describe is bad management. Like they may reward their police officers based on the number of arrests or "tickets", not on actual real problems solved.

And the data issue is there whether you allow "AI" to analyze the data or mere mortal humans have to analyze it.

Advantage of AI may be that you can fix mistakes ones and they are fixed forever (like, let's say, an unjust bias against black people), whereas humans tend to fall in the same traps over and over again.

Even if the AI identifies many people, there still have to be humans checking them out. The limited number of humans may have more time to check each suspect out than they would have without the AI, because the AI takes over some of the work.

Humans can be aware of the limitations of "AI". It's very rare that somebody drives into a lake because of GPS failures.

Computers are only a tool. Humans have to make the final decisions. Under those circumstances, what exactly is the problem?

I notice that all the articles warning about AI supervision never mention the error rate of humans. Humans misidentify people, too.

Also, if there is higher prevalence of crime in certain areas, it makes sense to do more policing there. Now it is illegal to detect higher prevalence of crime?

This is stupid.

A couple of billion people have also been added to the workforce at the same time.