4 ms·
What a tired, lazy cliché... Why don’t you engage with the content of the article: But when COMPAS’ prediction was inaccurate (either predicting re-arrest when
by shaki-dora 9y ago
What a tired, lazy cliché...
Why don’t you engage with the content of the article: But when COMPAS’ prediction was inaccurate (either predicting re-arrest when none happened, or not predicting an actual re-arrest) it routinely underestimated the probability of white recidivism and over-estimated the probability of black recidivism. In other words, it contained a bias hidden from the perspective of one set of statistics, but plainly visible in another..
Edit, because you noticed how unhelpful “ha ha, Betteridge” by itself is: intent may not be necessary for discrimination, nor can you deny intent when you continue to use methods shown to produce discriminatory outcomes.
A profit motive is similarly useless as a defense of discrimination. Maybe young, white, heterosexual female employees are better for sales, because you operate in a xeno-, homo-, gymno-, gerontophobic neigbourhood. But it’s no excuse to limit your job ads to that demographic.
One reason is that such logic perpetuates its own causes: if the police is more likely to stop&frisk non-whites, you will have fewer whites in your arrest statistics, even if they commit the same number of crimes. To then turn around and use those statistics to justify your racist police procedures is both morally and scientifically bankrupt.
- merlincorey 9y agoI feel like intent is necessary for racial discrimination. To discriminate between racial discrimination and mere ignorance or ineptitude one must look at the intent.
- aalleavitch 9y agoWhy would that matter if the outcome is the same? People are being disadvantaged solely on the basis of race, whether this is being done intentionally or not it's harmful and needs to be rectified.
- shaki-dora 9y agoWhy should intent matter? These are not criminal cases, but civil. If an employer is discriminating against a group because of unconscious biases, or using methods that lead to Discriminstory outcomes, there are real people who were harmed. Civil law isn’t about morality. It’s about righting a wrong. If you die because a mechanic negligently forgot to reconnect your car’s brake lines, you (and your family) will be harmed. The question for the courts then becomes shifting that harm to the party responsible, as far as that is possible, and your family will likely be awarded damages.
- astura 9y agoThe law doesn't agree with you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disparate_impact https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disparate_impact
- nerdponx 9y agoIf you are ignorant, and through your ignorance you help perpetuate and perpetrate racism, you personally may not be racist, but you are still perpetuating racism.