4 ms·

Alternately: criminal prosecution is targeted at people who "look like" criminals; thus, the NN is just selecting those people we think look like criminals, rat

by thechao 10y ago

Alternately: criminal prosecution is targeted at people who "look like" criminals; thus, the NN is just selecting those people we think look like criminals, rather than any inherent criminality.

ganeshkrishnan 10y ago
This is so true. We are training the neural networks from our own bias and cannot expect it to be fair. A supervised ML algorithm is as good as it's training data and in our current scenario the training data is almost always flawed. Judges receiving kickbacks to throw minors into juvenile jail, racial bias in sentences, jail for marijuana, private prison etc. These are all trademarks of a broken penal system and we cannot and should not train machines based on this data.
- daveguy 10y ago
  > Judges receiving kickbacks to throw minors into juvenile jail, racial bias in sentences, jail for marijuana, private prison etc. I expect you have some solid evidence for this? Maybe just a citation? Anything? Obviously there is institutional racial bias, but kickbacks for private jails? for marijuana? for minors? Really?
  - ken_railey 10y ago
    Not the person you're responding to, but I assume that the kickbacks comment was referring to cases like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal
  - woodruffw 10y ago
    > Judges receiving kickbacks to throw minors into juvenile jail He's probably referring to "Kids For Cash" [0]. > racial bias in sentences You can look at federal and state incarceration statistics for yourself. African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans serve, on average, longer sentences for the same crimes as their Caucasian counterparts. Here's one source.[1] > jail for marijuana Mandatory minimums for possession (especially "with intent to sell") have been part of federal drug enforcement policy for the last 50 years. Here are a few of them.[2] > private prison etc It was only this year that the DOJ finally committed to eliminating private prisons in the federal system.[3] They're still a massive part of state penitentiary systems (see: cash for kids). [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal [1]: https://www.aclu.org/issues/mass-incarceration/racial-disparities-criminal-justice https://www.aclu.org/issues/mass-incarceration/racial-dispar... [2]: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/snitch/primer/ http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/snitch/primer/ [3]: https://www.justice.gov/opa/blog/phasing-out-our-use-private-prisons https://www.justice.gov/opa/blog/phasing-out-our-use-private...
    - daveguy 10y ago
      I misread that as "Judges receiving kickbacks to:" 1) throw minors into juvenile jail, 2) racial bias in sentences, 3) jail for marijuana, 4) private prison 5) etc. But the kickbacks was in the cash for kids scandal -- hopefully isolated criminal corruption in judges. The others are definitely negative and indications of a broken system, but not the level of "judges taking cash for sentences" corruption. Thank you for the clarification.
      - bitJericho 10y ago
        Anybody who actually wants to be a judge in the American system is corrupt. The American system of justice is so obviously flawed that only a person corrupt in their thinking would want to become a judge.
        grzm 10y ago
        [Removed]
        SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
        Is a loving husband, devoted father, kind neighbor, etc etc person who drove trains for the Nazi's a good person? I feel that most people are in (considerably less extreme) versions of that situation: kind, generous people in general, who simply don't think about how the fairly banal things they do every day are part of really bad stuff. The distributed, banal nature of modern evils -- and they were intentionally structured that way so people wouldnt think about it -- is really what allows evil to flourish in modern society. Yeah, it wasnt a big deal you flipped a train switch (or filled out mortgage loan paperwork a little shoddily, etc), and likely someone else would've done it instead, but if we all refused to do it, the world would be a better place. I think many US judges are similar: they're good, a little bit selfish people who just don't think about the evil they contribute to. Enforcing unjust laws, even fairly, is evil. And (almost) all US judges are guilty of that. (Eg, mandatory minimum drug laws, which empirically just cause harm.)
    - 10y ago
- informatimago 10y ago
  The next step is obviously for machine to go search for their data themselves. You could have an app in smartphones that would detect criminal activity, so they could collect global data on actual criminal activity (bias: by people having smartphones with them). So you'd need to have little autonomous robots following and watching every human being, and detecting automatically criminal activity, and then they could share their data and now machines could learn unbiased.
berntb 10y ago
That is testable. Prison populations should look different in areas where a larger fraction of serious crimes are solved. (It is hardly likely that a large enough fraction of people in prison are innocent to influence TFA's gigantic results of 89+%!) So Occam's razor seems to imply that something changes in the face for people with e.g. (lead) poisoning, brain defects leading to psychopathy/violent tendencies or something else? It could alternatively be in the life style of criminals. Drug use or attitude to others? Someone that really prey on people might even have changed hormone levels, or something, as it might be an evolutionary strategy? Or just body language, but not for face pictures of course. In Sweden, when a state security group hired people with police training, they didn't hire police that ever worked on the streets because it changes the body language in some way; they are recognized by criminals -- and vice versa. (This is old, I have no clue how it is today.)
- berntb 10y ago
  This BBC article also quotes people arguing that this recognition might just be a tendency for a judge/jury to find someone guilty. Again, that can't explain how you can reach 89.5% hit frequency?! Even in China, there needs to be some evidence... right? To me, that argument sounds like "double think", because of fears of a 1984 society -- where people are characterized from their faces. (That is stupid, if this can really be refined and made to work, then active criminals would just do cosmetic operations.) If those results goes against your ideology, just note that it isn't peer reviewed yet. :-) http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-38092196 http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-38092196
agumonkey 10y ago
Internet Bubble great escape plan into reality. We're in for a thrill.

by thechao 10y ago

Alternately: criminal prosecution is targeted at people who "look like" criminals; thus, the NN is just selecting those people we think look like criminals, rather than any inherent criminality.

ganeshkrishnan 10y ago

This is so true. We are training the neural networks from our own bias and cannot expect it to be fair. A supervised ML algorithm is as good as it's training data and in our current scenario the training data is almost always flawed. Judges receiving kickbacks to throw minors into juvenile jail, racial bias in sentences, jail for marijuana, private prison etc. These are all trademarks of a broken penal system and we cannot and should not train machines based on this data.

daveguy 10y ago
> Judges receiving kickbacks to throw minors into juvenile jail, racial bias in sentences, jail for marijuana, private prison etc. I expect you have some solid evidence for this? Maybe just a citation? Anything? Obviously there is institutional racial bias, but kickbacks for private jails? for marijuana? for minors? Really?
- ken_railey 10y ago
  Not the person you're responding to, but I assume that the kickbacks comment was referring to cases like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal
- woodruffw 10y ago
  > Judges receiving kickbacks to throw minors into juvenile jail He's probably referring to "Kids For Cash" [0]. > racial bias in sentences You can look at federal and state incarceration statistics for yourself. African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans serve, on average, longer sentences for the same crimes as their Caucasian counterparts. Here's one source.[1] > jail for marijuana Mandatory minimums for possession (especially "with intent to sell") have been part of federal drug enforcement policy for the last 50 years. Here are a few of them.[2] > private prison etc It was only this year that the DOJ finally committed to eliminating private prisons in the federal system.[3] They're still a massive part of state penitentiary systems (see: cash for kids). [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal [1]: https://www.aclu.org/issues/mass-incarceration/racial-disparities-criminal-justice https://www.aclu.org/issues/mass-incarceration/racial-dispar... [2]: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/snitch/primer/ http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/snitch/primer/ [3]: https://www.justice.gov/opa/blog/phasing-out-our-use-private-prisons https://www.justice.gov/opa/blog/phasing-out-our-use-private...
  - daveguy 10y ago
    I misread that as "Judges receiving kickbacks to:" 1) throw minors into juvenile jail, 2) racial bias in sentences, 3) jail for marijuana, 4) private prison 5) etc. But the kickbacks was in the cash for kids scandal -- hopefully isolated criminal corruption in judges. The others are definitely negative and indications of a broken system, but not the level of "judges taking cash for sentences" corruption. Thank you for the clarification.
    - bitJericho 10y ago
      Anybody who actually wants to be a judge in the American system is corrupt. The American system of justice is so obviously flawed that only a person corrupt in their thinking would want to become a judge.
      - grzm 10y ago
        [Removed]
        SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
        Is a loving husband, devoted father, kind neighbor, etc etc person who drove trains for the Nazi's a good person? I feel that most people are in (considerably less extreme) versions of that situation: kind, generous people in general, who simply don't think about how the fairly banal things they do every day are part of really bad stuff. The distributed, banal nature of modern evils -- and they were intentionally structured that way so people wouldnt think about it -- is really what allows evil to flourish in modern society. Yeah, it wasnt a big deal you flipped a train switch (or filled out mortgage loan paperwork a little shoddily, etc), and likely someone else would've done it instead, but if we all refused to do it, the world would be a better place. I think many US judges are similar: they're good, a little bit selfish people who just don't think about the evil they contribute to. Enforcing unjust laws, even fairly, is evil. And (almost) all US judges are guilty of that. (Eg, mandatory minimum drug laws, which empirically just cause harm.)
  - 10y ago
informatimago 10y ago
The next step is obviously for machine to go search for their data themselves. You could have an app in smartphones that would detect criminal activity, so they could collect global data on actual criminal activity (bias: by people having smartphones with them). So you'd need to have little autonomous robots following and watching every human being, and detecting automatically criminal activity, and then they could share their data and now machines could learn unbiased.

berntb 10y ago

That is testable. Prison populations should look different in areas where a larger fraction of serious crimes are solved. (It is hardly likely that a large enough fraction of people in prison are innocent to influence TFA's gigantic results of 89+%!) So Occam's razor seems to imply that something changes in the face for people with e.g. (lead) poisoning, brain defects leading to psychopathy/violent tendencies or something else? It could alternatively be in the life style of criminals. Drug use or attitude to others? Someone that really prey on people might even have changed hormone levels, or something, as it might be an evolutionary strategy? Or just body language, but not for face pictures of course. In Sweden, when a state security group hired people with police training, they didn't hire police that ever worked on the streets because it changes the body language in some way; they are recognized by criminals -- and vice versa. (This is old, I have no clue how it is today.)

berntb 10y ago
This BBC article also quotes people arguing that this recognition might just be a tendency for a judge/jury to find someone guilty. Again, that can't explain how you can reach 89.5% hit frequency?! Even in China, there needs to be some evidence... right? To me, that argument sounds like "double think", because of fears of a 1984 society -- where people are characterized from their faces. (That is stupid, if this can really be refined and made to work, then active criminals would just do cosmetic operations.) If those results goes against your ideology, just note that it isn't peer reviewed yet. :-) http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-38092196 http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-38092196

agumonkey 10y ago

Internet Bubble great escape plan into reality. We're in for a thrill.