7 ms·

Is this because the upscale neighborhoods were more likely to have phoned to do the reporting?

• dstyrb 11y ago
  At that time I think it had to do with disproportionate smartphone penetration (since it was a smartphone app, not a phone number, you just tap it when you see a pothole and it sends your geodata). But then and now, even close to 100% smartphone ownership, I think it's the same thing with disproportionate app penetration. What social groups actually use foursquare and twitter and with what frequency?
  • ncr100 11y ago
    I believe this can be generalized to all minority oppression. Minorities' views / needs not being honored since they're in the minority, or have a minority level of access to valuable / high-utility resources. Solution: high-level resource owners share in the _human experience_ of low-level owners, determining ad-hoc and with empathy how to extend support / normalize quality of life.
    • dstyrb 11y ago
      What? I'm fairly positive this has nothing to do with oppression except in a wildly politicized worldview where somehow lower socioeconomic areas were actually prohibited access to the reporting functionality. As far as I'm aware this wasn't the case, it was a completely unintended side effect of a good idea: we can save money on pothole patrols by letting people report potholes and then fix them in a queue-like order from when they were reported thus lowering costs and improving response time... And here they are trying to make city planning decisions with something that I think will probably suffer the same bias. It's not an intentional classist plan, it's just not fully thought out (although I don't know this, maybe if I read the paper they will talk about controlling for this effect). And I don't see anything in your solution that would solve anything, you seem to have just thrown a ton of hotwords into a grammatical structure...