591
AI error jails innocent grandmother for months in North Dakota fraud case
(www.grandforksherald.com)
this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2026
591 points (99.2% liked)
Technology
82621 readers
5012 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Sue the software company for defamation.
There are 4 things that need to be true for a defamation case. The statement must be false. The statement must be presented in away a reasonable person would believe it. The statement must be published for at least one other person to see. The statement must cause harm
The hardest part will be the second condition. The software publisher probably has all kinds of disclaimers in their EULA to cover this one. It also depends on how the software presents the information to the user.
The woman didn't sign a EULA with the vendor.
I would say your three reqs are met.
It's not the woman it's the police officer/department that would agree. So, if there is language saying the user knows and understands that the system is not accurate then it becomes harder to go after the developer.
I find it hard to believe the software gives a yes or no answer. It almost certainly gives some sort of score and it’s up to the human to interpret that.
This is entirely on Fargo police
If I was the architect of the system that is how I would do it. However a high enough score could still be sufficient in this case. The system made an assertion that lead to damages even if the assertion was 60% match.