Item — HN Reader

OP > Algorithm aversion is a product of diverse mechanisms, including ... (5) asymmetrical forgiveness, or a larger negative reaction to algorithmic error than to human error.

The legal rule that computers are presumed to be operating correctly https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40052611

> In England and Wales, courts consider computers, as a matter of law, to have been working correctly unless there is evidence to the contrary. Therefore, evidence produced by computers is treated as reliable unless other evidence suggests otherwise.

1 comments

Your belief that this rule is wrong is an example of algorithm aversion. You feel like computer systems should be judged harshly despite mistaking far more rarely than other things assessed in courts like police witness accounts or possibly even DNA evidence.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56718036.amp

Of course there are mistakes. But still fewer than with other sources of evidence.

DNA evidence is also trusted by default and yet:

https://www.science.org/content/article/forensics-gone-wrong...

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/investigation-finds-col...

You’re missing the point. Of course there are (enormous, life-ruining) mistakes, but that’s not it.

With software, generally the only people with the means to demonstrate the software is flawed are the people in control of the software and associated data.

Don't forget the hardware. The hardware is also inscrutable by people who are not a specialist in the field of that hardware.

I don't think demonstrating that DNA evidence against you lies is any easier.