"between 29 percent and 38 percent of predictions about whether someone is low-risk end up being wrong" Wouldn't win a Kaggle contest with that error rate. Wha

"between 29 percent and 38 percent of predictions about whether someone is low-risk end up being wrong" Wouldn't win a Kaggle contest with that error rate. What's not disclosed is the percent of predictions about whether someone is high-risk ending up being wrong. These are the ones society should be worried about. And these are the ones that are, if such a system is put into practice, impossible to track. Because all the high-risk people are locked up. The socio-political fallout of randomly letting some high-risk people free to validate the algorithm makes this inevitable. This leaves us in a situation where political pressure is always towards reducing the number of people classified as low-risk who then re-offend. Statistical competence is not prevalent enough in the general population to prevent this. TL;DR our society is either not well-educated enough or is improperly structured to correctly apply algorithms for criminal justice.