The algorithm doesn't care about criminal culpability except to prevent it, but therein lies the point: if a person's perception of the world is so distorted by psychosis that they don't realize, say, plowing their car into oncoming traffic will kill other drivers, how would the algorithm interpret, intervene, and prevent the action based on the psychotic individual's own perceptions?
What, exactly, does the algorithm stop? Is it only overt physical violence? In that case, what about people who act maliciously toward others, but do so without physical violence, like the boy who took the nude photo of Annie without her knowledge or consent, then posted it publicly? What about people who act violently but not maliciously, like a person who is defending themselves? What about people that do not view their actions as being harmful to others, such as someone who is truly delusional or psychotic? There is a relatively common yardstick of criminal culpability known as the M'Naghten Rule it basically states that people who are so deranged as to not know either (1) the nature or quality of their actions or (2) that what they are doing is wrong are not criminal but mentally ill. What, exactly, does the …more The algorithm is something that sounds like a good idea at first, but has more and more problems the more you think about it. Amy The algorithm is something that sounds like a good idea at first, but has more and more problems the more you think about it.
0 kommentar(er)
