3 ms·
The problem is that people view pure statistical based crime probability as "unbiased" because... math. It's not! Most bias is deeply hidden, and our training d
by nkozyra 8y ago
The problem is that people view pure statistical based crime probability as "unbiased" because... math. It's not! Most bias is deeply hidden, and our training data comes directly or indirectly from some form of human subjectivity.
The more autonomy plays a role in our lives, the more aware we need to be of how internal bias from human source has affected things like predictions.
And please, there is nothing more flippant and off-putting than railing against "SJWs," this is a topic that demands thoughtfulness.
- unstuckdev 8y agoI still see people call policing maps "crime maps" as though you could map out all the crime like in SimCity.
- tomp 8y ago> The problem is that people view pure statistical based crime probability as "unbiased" because... math. It's not! Can you explain what you mean? “Biased” usually means not using just statistics but also extra-statistical personal convictions. What does “unbiased” mean for you?
- nkozyra 8y agoWhere do the numbers come from? What is the context of collection of data? What is the context of the classification of training data? There are hundreds of questions like that which apply. It's not (necessarily, it certainly can be) the algorithm that carries bias, it's the data.
- pokemongoaway 8y agoYour reply was not thoughtful at all. All you're doing is pushing a belief without evidence. Where exactly is this bias hidden? Saying that you don't have it and others do should require some citation as well - and is incredibly self-righteous. I don't see anything wrong with criticizing SJWs in a political post by SJWs!