4 ms·

> So having more cops in a high-crime neighborhood is somehow a bad thing, because the presence of more police actually confirms the fact that there is more of

> So having more cops in a high-crime neighborhood is somehow a bad thing, because the presence of more police actually confirms the fact that there is more of a need of police in this neighborhood? Did you understand what you quoted? The author is saying that citations for petty offences (which practically everyone commits with some non-zero frequency, intentionally or not) have a higher chance of affecting future prospects of people in communities where there are more police. the Author isn't saying police are bad in general, rather that the negative effects of police presence are more significant in communities with higher police presence. > So targeted advertising to the needs of people is bad because... I can't even make sense of this one. The message isn't that hard to get, come on. The author is saying (assuming you think like them) that ignorance of suffering is a bad thing. You can say something like "why should I care about people I don't know", and I would understand and even agree to a large part with that statement, but this isn't James Joyce here, you can make sense of it.

bko 10y ago
> the Author isn't saying police are bad in general, rather that the negative effects of police presence are more significant in communities with higher police presence. Yes, but are there any positive effects of police presence? Does this outweight the negative effects? > The author is saying (assuming you think like them) that ignorance of suffering is a bad thing So seeing poorly targeted ads tells you that people are suffering? It is the role of corporations to inform you that there are people who have different needs than you?
- hood_syntax 10y ago
  > Yes, but are there any positive effects of police presence? Does this outweight the negative effects? Certainly I would agree that police have positive effects as well. Your second question really is the crux of the issue, and I can't answer that. > So seeing poorly targeted ads tells you that people are suffering? It is the role of corporations to inform you that there are people who have different needs than you? Suffering was perhaps poor word choice. Obviously it's not the responsibility of some faceless corporation that I be informed about what's going on in the world, but it would be nice if they didn't cut down incidental information the masses might receive so it fits in their little corner of the world.
burgreblast 10y ago
> petty offences (which practically everyone commits with > some non-zero frequency, This isn't Josef K in Kafka's Der Process. Most people don't have any trouble avoiding arrestable behavior. Lawlessness is not a virtue. >ignorance of suffering Ads for bad for-pay universitites are good to remind us of... suffering? And sorry, but even "awareness of suffering" isn't virtuous either. It's what you DO about what you know.
- macintux 10y ago
  > Most people don't have any trouble avoiding arrestable behavior. I think we've pretty well established the past couple of years that there is no lower bound on what's considered "arrestable behavior" when it comes to minorities in the US.
  - burgreblast 10y ago
    >there is no lower bound on what's considered "arrestable behavior" Really? I wouldn't throw in the towel. If there's corruption, that's still a crime. Why not figure out how to highlight it and stop it? When you find bugs in your code do you throw up your hands and proclaim that it could be anywhere so it's too hard to find and fix? Do you not fix the easy-to-see bugs because that's somehow unfair? Do you not fix the harder-to-find bugs becuase your biased? You make the software operate according to your vision and purpose. You and go out of your way to ensure order and correctness. No need to shrug off harder-to-solve social issues as impossible.
    - NotSammyHagar 10y ago
      > If there's corruption, that's still a crime. Why not figure out how to highlight it and stop it? That sounds nice, but in practice, white collar crime, often committed by white people, has much lower incarceration rates than simple drug crimes. Even in Seattle, where its now legal to posses pot but not legal to smoke it publicly (yet this is routinely ignored), we found that black people were being incarcerated at a much higher rate than white people for public smoking of pot. An investigation found that there was one freaking cop who went around arresting tons of black people for this 'crime'. This is the world we live in. Edited to fix a typo

bko 10y ago

> the Author isn't saying police are bad in general, rather that the negative effects of police presence are more significant in communities with higher police presence. Yes, but are there any positive effects of police presence? Does this outweight the negative effects? > The author is saying (assuming you think like them) that ignorance of suffering is a bad thing So seeing poorly targeted ads tells you that people are suffering? It is the role of corporations to inform you that there are people who have different needs than you?

hood_syntax 10y ago
> Yes, but are there any positive effects of police presence? Does this outweight the negative effects? Certainly I would agree that police have positive effects as well. Your second question really is the crux of the issue, and I can't answer that. > So seeing poorly targeted ads tells you that people are suffering? It is the role of corporations to inform you that there are people who have different needs than you? Suffering was perhaps poor word choice. Obviously it's not the responsibility of some faceless corporation that I be informed about what's going on in the world, but it would be nice if they didn't cut down incidental information the masses might receive so it fits in their little corner of the world.

burgreblast 10y ago

> petty offences (which practically everyone commits with > some non-zero frequency, This isn't Josef K in Kafka's Der Process. Most people don't have any trouble avoiding arrestable behavior. Lawlessness is not a virtue. >ignorance of suffering Ads for bad for-pay universitites are good to remind us of... suffering? And sorry, but even "awareness of suffering" isn't virtuous either. It's what you DO about what you know.

macintux 10y ago
> Most people don't have any trouble avoiding arrestable behavior. I think we've pretty well established the past couple of years that there is no lower bound on what's considered "arrestable behavior" when it comes to minorities in the US.
- burgreblast 10y ago
  >there is no lower bound on what's considered "arrestable behavior" Really? I wouldn't throw in the towel. If there's corruption, that's still a crime. Why not figure out how to highlight it and stop it? When you find bugs in your code do you throw up your hands and proclaim that it could be anywhere so it's too hard to find and fix? Do you not fix the easy-to-see bugs because that's somehow unfair? Do you not fix the harder-to-find bugs becuase your biased? You make the software operate according to your vision and purpose. You and go out of your way to ensure order and correctness. No need to shrug off harder-to-solve social issues as impossible.
  - NotSammyHagar 10y ago
    > If there's corruption, that's still a crime. Why not figure out how to highlight it and stop it? That sounds nice, but in practice, white collar crime, often committed by white people, has much lower incarceration rates than simple drug crimes. Even in Seattle, where its now legal to posses pot but not legal to smoke it publicly (yet this is routinely ignored), we found that black people were being incarcerated at a much higher rate than white people for public smoking of pot. An investigation found that there was one freaking cop who went around arresting tons of black people for this 'crime'. This is the world we live in. Edited to fix a typo