Pretty much everything has false positives and false negatives. Everything can be reduced to this.

Human radiologists have them. They can miss things: false negative. They can misdiagnose things: false positive.

Interviews have them. A person can do well, be hired and turn out to be bad employee: false positive. A person who would have been a good employee can do badly due to situational factors and not get hired: false negative.

The justice system has them. An innocent person can be judged guilty: false positive. A guilty person can be judged innocent: false negative.

All policy decisions are about balancing out the false negatives against the false positives.

Medical practice is generally obsessed with stamping out false negatives: sucks to be you if you're the doctor who straight up missed something. False positives are avoided as much as possible by defensive wording that avoids outright affirming things. You never say the patient has the disease, you merely suggest that this finding could mean that the patient has the disease.

Hiring is expensive and firing even more so depending on jurisdiction, so corporations want to minimize false positives as much as humanly possible. If they ever hire anyone, they want to be sure it's absolutely the right person for them. They don't really care that they might miss out on good people.

There are all sorts of political groups trying to tip the balance of justice in favor of false negatives or false positivies. Some would rather see guilty go free than watch a single innocent be punished by mistake. Others don't care about innocents at all. I could cite some but it'd no doubt lead to controversy.