But that said, nothing here that proper machine learning couldn't handle.
My security cameras love to declare that they detected motion because a car drove by and swept its headlights across my porch, and my cameras use a simple change detector.
What are the consequences of false positives? For me, I get a notification, check it, and roll my eyes. For a lock, it opens too often? I have no idea what the consequences of that are. Maybe that's perfectly acceptable and a simple change detector is enough. Or maybe it changes water balance somehow and causes ecological problems, or impacts boat navigation (I mean, the lock is there for a reason in the first place right?)
Sometimes complex solutions are justified. A camera is more complex than just looking into the water with your naked eye. But that necessitates having someone physically present, and able to see through the water. Everyone agrees that the complexity is worth it.
I've worked with too many PMs who want the fastest easy solution without regard for the actual use case and then get perplexed by the side effects (that they were previously told about but refused to grasp). And generally I wind up being the person forced to be physically present watching for fish because the PM thought adding a camera was too much complexity.
It happened with blockchain, it's happening with AI, it'll happen with the next big thing too, just as it has with many big things in the past.