[innes]

The real problem is that it presupposes thought-crime.

The problem with that is that it's hysterical bullshit, and implies that people will be prosecuted for thoughts. This is a tool for helping to target effort in the screening process.

To be fair, the article itself was guilty of being nonsense first. Mentioning 'ethnicity' as an input to the system was the give-away. Even if true, this would never be admitted by whoever was developing the system in question. When I read that, the red flag went up, and I assumed the entire article was untrustworthy. But then, I wasn't on the lookout for sensational stuff to get worked up about.