3 ms·

> This is a premature application of software. maybe, but you have no idea yourself so your fear does not carry enough weight to carry that statement. It's bas

> This is a premature application of software. maybe, but you have no idea yourself so your fear does not carry enough weight to carry that statement. It's basically like you are saying "it's too early to try Bayesian policing" when in fact Bayesian policing might be a great idea, and it was a great idea 10 years ago too. Conditional probability, if there have been a lot of rapes in a 2 block radius, do you think it might be a good idea to look in that radius? If you try that and the crimewave continues but moves 2 blocks away, do you think there might be information to glean from that? considering individual cops as bees in a hive, can individual bees make good Bayesian decisions about where to fly next? No, the information needs to be consolidated centrally. Who's better at Bayesian calculations, people or computers? I'm sure there is all sorts of defective software out there, just like there are all sorts of other lazily/cheaply produced products that don't live up to our needs. That doesn't mean it's too early to try improvements.

riazrizvi 6y ago
Why not take your Bayesian decision theory and make a trading system? Invest your farm, and you'll make millions with ideas like, if a stock just had two upticks, isn't it a good idea to put a little money into an upward trending stock. Not only will you come to understand decision theory better, behavioral prediction better, you'll get paid to do it, and nobody else will get hurt!
- google234123 6y ago
  The stock market isn't the same thing...
  - greenshackle2 6y ago
    To spell it out: The stock market is anti-inductive by design. Statistical patterns that reflect market inefficiencies are supposed to disappear over time. Most problems are not anti-inductive. So yeah, "you can't even predict the stock market with your methods" is a pretty terrible argument against methods that were never meant to predict the stock market.
astrophysician 6y ago
Yea but you're ignoring biases in the data that are difficult or impossible to disentangle from the underlying effects. What happens when you see an area with 50% higher violent crime rate? Is that because there are a large number of crimes? Or is it because it's a neighborhood that is disproportionately targeted by police? How do you even attempt to control for that? It's not that Bayesian stats can't help or can't offer insights, it's that it can easily reinforce underlying societal biases, and then it's harder to question because "it's science" and no one has to take any responsibility for its effects.
- medee 6y ago
  Our knowledge of crime rates doesn't come form arrest records, but rather victims surveys. Yes, we know that certain neighborhoods/populations have higher rates of crime and not just arrests.
- kansface 6y ago
  > Or is it because it's a neighborhood that is disproportionately targeted by police? I'd guess violent crime mostly "comes from" people calling 911, not from officers stumbling into rapes/mugging/murders/home invasions.
- fsckboy 6y ago
  I was arguing that it's not "premature" to analyze crime and policing data statistically. If we include and add in your insights--and I think it's foolish to think crime experts haven't thought of them before, but if they haven't: I would still argue that it's not "premature" to look at crime and policing data; in fact, I'd say it's high time we did it. tl;dr you are not addressing what I was arguing (and to everybody else here, I was not advocation Bayes Theorem, I was relying on it as a baseline truth for synecdoche for statistical analysis. If you want to object to Bayes Theorem, that's on you, it wasn't my point...)
  - astrophysician 6y ago
    no one is objecting to Bayes' Theorem here at all. I am directly addressing your argument: there is _inherent_ bias in policing data, and doing a Bayesian analysis will make it very easy to fool ourselves into trusting the results while also allowing everyone in the room to absolve themselves of taking any responsibility for the consequences of doing so. Pretending we know how to debias policing data _broadly_ (i.e. we know how to do it in every locale and in every instance that the data will actually be _used by practicing law enforcement professionals_) is a perfect recipe for disaster.
wizzwizz4 6y ago
Ideal Bayesian decision theory, the one that beats every single other possible statistical method, is uncomputable in this universe. It's not a silver bullet.
A4ET8a8uTh0 6y ago
Hmm. You make it sound like very new idea and tool is worthy of equal and fair consideration. If a polician today said they introducing No Crime Left behind, where cops randomly select time and place to swarm, would a rational person even dream of debating its merits?
boring_twenties 6y ago
You are talking about theory, GP is talking about the actual computer systems that police have today. And in fact GP already made good suggestions for bridging the gap: > far stricter processes should be in place, more similar to getting approval for a new airplane or medicine

riazrizvi 6y ago

Why not take your Bayesian decision theory and make a trading system? Invest your farm, and you'll make millions with ideas like, if a stock just had two upticks, isn't it a good idea to put a little money into an upward trending stock. Not only will you come to understand decision theory better, behavioral prediction better, you'll get paid to do it, and nobody else will get hurt!

google234123 6y ago
The stock market isn't the same thing...
- greenshackle2 6y ago
  To spell it out: The stock market is anti-inductive by design. Statistical patterns that reflect market inefficiencies are supposed to disappear over time. Most problems are not anti-inductive. So yeah, "you can't even predict the stock market with your methods" is a pretty terrible argument against methods that were never meant to predict the stock market.

astrophysician 6y ago

Yea but you're ignoring biases in the data that are difficult or impossible to disentangle from the underlying effects. What happens when you see an area with 50% higher violent crime rate? Is that because there are a large number of crimes? Or is it because it's a neighborhood that is disproportionately targeted by police? How do you even attempt to control for that? It's not that Bayesian stats can't help or can't offer insights, it's that it can easily reinforce underlying societal biases, and then it's harder to question because "it's science" and no one has to take any responsibility for its effects.

medee 6y ago
Our knowledge of crime rates doesn't come form arrest records, but rather victims surveys. Yes, we know that certain neighborhoods/populations have higher rates of crime and not just arrests.
kansface 6y ago
> Or is it because it's a neighborhood that is disproportionately targeted by police? I'd guess violent crime mostly "comes from" people calling 911, not from officers stumbling into rapes/mugging/murders/home invasions.
fsckboy 6y ago
I was arguing that it's not "premature" to analyze crime and policing data statistically. If we include and add in your insights--and I think it's foolish to think crime experts haven't thought of them before, but if they haven't: I would still argue that it's not "premature" to look at crime and policing data; in fact, I'd say it's high time we did it. tl;dr you are not addressing what I was arguing (and to everybody else here, I was not advocation Bayes Theorem, I was relying on it as a baseline truth for synecdoche for statistical analysis. If you want to object to Bayes Theorem, that's on you, it wasn't my point...)
- astrophysician 6y ago
  no one is objecting to Bayes' Theorem here at all. I am directly addressing your argument: there is _inherent_ bias in policing data, and doing a Bayesian analysis will make it very easy to fool ourselves into trusting the results while also allowing everyone in the room to absolve themselves of taking any responsibility for the consequences of doing so. Pretending we know how to debias policing data _broadly_ (i.e. we know how to do it in every locale and in every instance that the data will actually be _used by practicing law enforcement professionals_) is a perfect recipe for disaster.

wizzwizz4 6y ago

Ideal Bayesian decision theory, the one that beats every single other possible statistical method, is uncomputable in this universe. It's not a silver bullet.

A4ET8a8uTh0 6y ago

Hmm. You make it sound like very new idea and tool is worthy of equal and fair consideration. If a polician today said they introducing No Crime Left behind, where cops randomly select time and place to swarm, would a rational person even dream of debating its merits?

boring_twenties 6y ago

You are talking about theory, GP is talking about the actual computer systems that police have today. And in fact GP already made good suggestions for bridging the gap: > far stricter processes should be in place, more similar to getting approval for a new airplane or medicine