"Social Services" to use artificial intelligence to decide which children to seize BEFORE PARENTS DO ANYTHING WRONG.

This is right out of "A Brave New World," by Aldous Huxley. If you haven't read it, you need to, because it is absolutely where society is heading--where THE STATE owns all the kids, and parents are only there to act as the state's free daycare, IF the state likes the way the parents are raising THEIR children.

I've written many items before about how the "guilty-until-proven-innocent" milieu in America basically started in the arena of so-called "social services," and how we have decided in the name of "protecting children" that parents are always guilty if someone reports them. Now, the government is deciding that they don't need to wait (in those somewhat rare cases where children are actually in real danger) and that they should just seize the children--often putting them, FOR SURE, into real danger-- in advance of even an anonymous report, based solely on computer algorithms.

Here is the article:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/sep/16/child-abuse-algorithms-from-science-fiction-to-cost-cutting-reality

Here is a key excerpt from the above link:

"Technology to intervene before crime can happen inevitably draws comparisons to the science-fiction film Minority Report, in which detectives use intelligence gathered from the dreams of psychics to arrest people for crimes before they commit them. 'I’ve heard that Minority Report reference I can’t tell you how many times,' said Shafiq (note: manager of the company pursuing such AI,) who cringes at the comparison. 'We haven’t got someone asleep, dreaming, there’s slightly more to it than that.' But the reference raises important questions about software accuracy. Predictive analytics systems in the real world are designed by humans, and risk incorporating and replicating all of their potential assumptions and mistakes. Both... claim the accuracy rate of their software is around 80%."

So, just to emphasize...THAT IT IS THE PURVEYOR WHO STANDS TO PROFIT from his technology telling you they are 80% accurate. What might the truth be under independent analysis...hmmm?...who knows how low that figure might really be? The article also points out all the variables they can't include because of public perceptions and the backlash against "profiling"...so how accurate can such a system EVER be, really?

It all just sounds more like BIG BROTHERISM from the country where it was invented. But, here in the States, we all have seen throughout history that "every time Britain sneezes, America catches cold." Also, computers will never be smarter than those who are doing the programming. AND, I have to wonder if the children of the super elites--and those already caught up in state seizure or the international sex trade--could ever, in any way, benefit from such a scheme. In other words, those who are already most at risk, and in constant, daily risk of further ongoing abuse, will never benefit from the nightmarish suggestions being forwarded here-- where a computer can order your children or grandchildren taken away without hearing or probable cause.

Which brings us to "whose values" will be entered in as variables in such an algorithm?? I wonder if fundamentalist Christians, activist pro-lifers, or avid gun collectors will score high on such a test? How about people who voted for Trump (or Maggie Thatcher, depending on locale.) What about people who attend church regularly? Uh huh..."social services" you may recall, is not exactly loaded with conservative people who have the values of "fly over country" in mind at all times.

This is just, IMHO, setting up another disaster in the making...i.e. another touch point for civil war between the empowered and the powerless. We should be focusing on BETTER TRAINING AND OVERSIGHT of "social services" personnel, rather than more invasive means of empowering those who already have immense, unwarranted power over families.