4 ms·

Lots of replies here that the algorithms can also be biased since humans design them or the data they are built from is biased. And this is certainly correct.

Lots of replies here that the algorithms can also be biased since humans design them or the data they are built from is biased. And this is certainly correct. But I believe an even bigger advantage of algorithms is repeatability. Yes initially the algorithms might be biased, but they will always given the same input, deliver the same verdict. And over time we will be able to perfect the algorithms. It's like automated testing. Initially at first automated testing is far less effective than manual testing, but as you add and improve your tests they outperform manual testing almost always. And just like with testing you reduce the need for manual testing, algorithms like these do not have to completely eliminate human judges, but can reduce the amount of cases they are needed for, with improvements in sentencing and processing times.

soundwave106 10y ago
The problem I have with this, is the assumption that the "we" perfecting the algorithm is going to be doing so with the best moral and ethical intentions. In this case, we are dealing with an area (law enforcement) which has in the past been misused for political / power purposes. In my opinion, such areas definitely needs some degree of checks and balances to prevent power abuse. Reducing risk assessment to a ML style single algorithmic number would give the people in charge of the algorithm an awful lot of power. I do agree that if humans were entirely moral and ethical, ML can be a huge net gain. I'm not sure I trust humanity that much, personally.