I'd argue is both cost-effective and fair to be as unbiased as possible.
But then it really depends on the nature of the fraud you're mentioning.
Is it people lying about their qualifications for entitlement?
Not declaring income?
But then it really depends on the nature of the fraud you're mentioning.
Is it people lying about their qualifications for entitlement?
Not declaring income?
Discrimination is discrimination. Its simply not allowed.
Yet if all roads lead to an accurate picture of reality, and reality is not equitable,
How is any investigation ever to be opened?
A neighbor is suspicious and watches an immigrant family like a hawk and reports things to bylaw and police? It's discriminatory in nature, yet legal because a human observed a predicate.
I think that is what we have to keep in the future. A human must witness the predicate for an investigation. Even that is flawed. But AI is on a whole other level.