Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Well it's not necessarily applicable.

DNA sequencing in forensics isn't a full sequencing it's just a profile with an 1 in n match usually in the low millions which outside of direct same sex familial match is going to be highly unlikely to be a false positive.

Forensic evidence doesn't exists in a vacuum it's looked at in context.

It's also worthy to note that most cases aren't an episode of CSI and most convictions still rely on witness testimony and or confessions.

Thats not to say that there haven't been bad practices in he past ranging from bad science to individual malpractice and even malice. But it's still better than just having he said she said, as forensics allow you to verify testimonies and build a plausible depicture of events.



Has the false positive rate been empirically evaluated?

The fact that most convictions rely on witnesses doesn't make me any happier. Human memory is deeply flawed.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: