5 ms·

That number should be compared to the rate human officers unnecessarily escalate a situation because they think there's a gun. I don't know that number but it c

That number should be compared to the rate human officers unnecessarily escalate a situation because they think there's a gun. I don't know that number but it could easily be higher than 16%.

parsnips 9y ago
It could easily be lower than 16% too. Much lower.
- burkaman 9y ago
  Right, I'm saying I don't know the number, but this algorithm shouldn't be judged against a theoretical perfect officer, because that's not reality.
wayn3 9y ago
It should really be compared to the number of instances human officer's act as if there could be a gun " just in case ". Like in a traffic stop. If officer's don't have to potentially gun someone down because they made a hectic movement 84% of the time, that's a pretty big win. Imagine 84% of " black guy mysteriously died" actually led to convictions of officers because their ai thing told them "definitely no gun, bro"
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > Imagine 84% of " black guy mysteriously died" actually led to convictions of officers because their ai thing told them "definitely no gun, bro" I imagine that, like body cameras, the AI thing will, in those events, conveniently be deactivated, malfunctioning, misplaced, or have it's records lost.
  - wayn3 9y ago
    probably. but you can only pull that stunt so many times.
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      > probably. but you can only pull that stunt so many times. How many? Because apparently we haven't yet reached it with body cams.
      - wayn3 9y ago
        Until you've produced a sample. Then some statistician can write a paper on it and someone takes it to the supreme court and 20 years later they will decide that there was probably something fishy going on. Like I know? But if you compound different systems, like the ai handgun thing and dont store the data in the same place, it becomes exponentially less likely that suddenly 2 critical systems failed at the same important moment for some reason. the real issue with police brutality is the fact that it is, in fact, legal, and police is trained to respond in such a way. what protesters get wrong about police brutality is that its supposedly illegal. it is not. most instances of police killing someone are actually legal. which doesn't make it right. but its legal. saying somethings illegal when its not just makes you look like an idiot. people need to protest for better laws, not getting individual cops sentenced, because that wont ever happen with any kind of regularity.

That number should be compared to the rate human officers unnecessarily escalate a situation because they think there's a gun. I don't know that number but it could easily be higher than 16%.

parsnips 9y ago

It could easily be lower than 16% too. Much lower.

burkaman 9y ago
Right, I'm saying I don't know the number, but this algorithm shouldn't be judged against a theoretical perfect officer, because that's not reality.

wayn3 9y ago

It should really be compared to the number of instances human officer's act as if there could be a gun " just in case ". Like in a traffic stop. If officer's don't have to potentially gun someone down because they made a hectic movement 84% of the time, that's a pretty big win. Imagine 84% of " black guy mysteriously died" actually led to convictions of officers because their ai thing told them "definitely no gun, bro"

dragonwriter 9y ago
> Imagine 84% of " black guy mysteriously died" actually led to convictions of officers because their ai thing told them "definitely no gun, bro" I imagine that, like body cameras, the AI thing will, in those events, conveniently be deactivated, malfunctioning, misplaced, or have it's records lost.
- wayn3 9y ago
  probably. but you can only pull that stunt so many times.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > probably. but you can only pull that stunt so many times. How many? Because apparently we haven't yet reached it with body cams.
    - wayn3 9y ago
      Until you've produced a sample. Then some statistician can write a paper on it and someone takes it to the supreme court and 20 years later they will decide that there was probably something fishy going on. Like I know? But if you compound different systems, like the ai handgun thing and dont store the data in the same place, it becomes exponentially less likely that suddenly 2 critical systems failed at the same important moment for some reason. the real issue with police brutality is the fact that it is, in fact, legal, and police is trained to respond in such a way. what protesters get wrong about police brutality is that its supposedly illegal. it is not. most instances of police killing someone are actually legal. which doesn't make it right. but its legal. saying somethings illegal when its not just makes you look like an idiot. people need to protest for better laws, not getting individual cops sentenced, because that wont ever happen with any kind of regularity.