[marc_abonce]

I just read "I've locked myself out of my digital life"[1] and it explains a concern that I have and sometimes struggle to explain.

> In the boring analogue world - I am pretty sure that I'd be able to convince a human that I am who I say I am. And, thus, get access to my accounts. I may have to go to court to force a company to give me access back, but it is possible.

> But when things are secured by an unassailable algorithm - I am out of luck. No amount of pleading will let me without the correct credentials. The company which provides my password manager simply doesn't have access to my passwords. There is no-one to convince. Code is law.

Everyone should understand this problem before they advocate to remove the in-person version of a process. The article's example sounds unlikely at first, but the same consequences can happen with any natural disaster or a robbery.

[1] https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2022/06/ive-locked-myself-out-of-my...

[stavros]

I don't think anyone is advocating for this, and it's not limited to AI (software with a bunch of rules has the same problem). The EU went so far as enshrining into law the right to always escalate any decision to a person.

[michael1999]

The crypto movement often advocates for this (e.g. code is law, not-your-keys), but their perception and commitment to it is usually paper thin.

[darkwater]

But we DO advocate to have everything encrypted with no possibility to recover it if you lose access to the master key. That creates interesting ramifications in OP argument.