3 ms·

>The problem with predictive policing is in the name. Inference (ML) predicts the future from the past. If the past is racist, then inference will create a raci

>The problem with predictive policing is in the name. Inference (ML) predicts the future from the past. If the past is racist, then inference will create a racist future. Since racism is systemic[1], especially when it comes to policing, predictive policing is actively working against an anti-racist future. One thing that constantly annoys me is that while people are becoming well aware of how racist our legal system is, but are still just as blind as ever to how sexist it is, despite the extent of sexism being greater than the extent of racism (the disparity of justice is greater for gender than for race). This in turn makes any speeches concerning how we need to make the system more just have a bit of a hollow ring to them much in the same way as when you hear a marriage equality speech from someone fighting for equality of interracial marriages while ignoring the discrimination same sex marriages face (granted, that happens far less than I remember 10 to 15 years ago). For example, you can find many police departments that handle probation have a way to rating the risk level of offenders. People are fine with this system taking into account gender even as they fight to prevent it from using race. I was able to help with testing one such system once, and while the insides were a company secret we weren't allowed to see (which is worth an entire rant on its own), the general pattern was for all else but gender being constant, males received a higher risk rating than females. Very minor or very severe crimes would receive the same ratings but otherwise it seemed pretty clear cut on how it discriminated based on gender. Even in this specific case, while they have banned some forms of predictive policing, I think it is safe to assume they'll still use other forms such as using gender when assessing the risk level of offenders and then using that risk level to either deny probation/parole or to set the level of probation/parole the offender receives.

monadic2 6y ago
While discontent with policing has bubbled up in the form of outrage over racist policing, I don’t see any obliviousness to gender at all—I mean I saw a sign just yesterday that read “bring our black men home”. It’s just very difficult, apparently, to express the nuances of systemic bigotry as expressed through policing in even something as short as a modern speech.
handoflixue 6y ago
Part of the problem with addressing Sexism in policing is that "women commit violent/dangerous crimes less often than men" is a less obviously wrong statement, since there are actually really clear biological differences between the sexes, and those biological differences influence both strength and propensity towards competitive/violent engagement. I am 100% not trying to defend this; I agree with you that there's a problem. But I've never actually seen much research that demonstrates that there's a problem, even when there obviously is one. For instance, women can't rape men and it is instead legally classed as "forced envelopment" or something, so there's... very, very clearly a disparity, but almost no one ever hears about it. I can't think of any reliable central archive of information that isn't vividly a "Men's Rights Activist" website that screams 90s conspiracy theorists. EDIT: If you do know of any useful sources for spreading the idea, I'd love to hear about them.
- SkyBelow 6y ago
  >since there are actually really clear biological differences between the sexes, and those biological differences influence both strength and propensity towards competitive/violent engagement. If someone tried to make the same argument about populations of individuals (I specifically use population instead of race due to how race is socially constructed from populations), would people even glance at the evidence before condemning them? At best you'll get those saying the results are tainted due to how society treats people and thus you cannot make any definite claims about biological differences, which would apply just as well to behavioral differences between males and females. Actually, I do often enough see such a claim applied to gender differences as well, though primarily when dealing with something where males appear to be perform better on some metric. At the core it shows that people are not consistently applying the logic to these situations, which leaves one to question what standard they actually are using and if we are even able to have an honest conversation as long as they do not admit (or maybe even remain unaware) of the other standard.

monadic2 6y ago

While discontent with policing has bubbled up in the form of outrage over racist policing, I don’t see any obliviousness to gender at all—I mean I saw a sign just yesterday that read “bring our black men home”. It’s just very difficult, apparently, to express the nuances of systemic bigotry as expressed through policing in even something as short as a modern speech.

handoflixue 6y ago

Part of the problem with addressing Sexism in policing is that "women commit violent/dangerous crimes less often than men" is a less obviously wrong statement, since there are actually really clear biological differences between the sexes, and those biological differences influence both strength and propensity towards competitive/violent engagement. I am 100% not trying to defend this; I agree with you that there's a problem. But I've never actually seen much research that demonstrates that there's a problem, even when there obviously is one. For instance, women can't rape men and it is instead legally classed as "forced envelopment" or something, so there's... very, very clearly a disparity, but almost no one ever hears about it. I can't think of any reliable central archive of information that isn't vividly a "Men's Rights Activist" website that screams 90s conspiracy theorists. EDIT: If you do know of any useful sources for spreading the idea, I'd love to hear about them.

SkyBelow 6y ago
>since there are actually really clear biological differences between the sexes, and those biological differences influence both strength and propensity towards competitive/violent engagement. If someone tried to make the same argument about populations of individuals (I specifically use population instead of race due to how race is socially constructed from populations), would people even glance at the evidence before condemning them? At best you'll get those saying the results are tainted due to how society treats people and thus you cannot make any definite claims about biological differences, which would apply just as well to behavioral differences between males and females. Actually, I do often enough see such a claim applied to gender differences as well, though primarily when dealing with something where males appear to be perform better on some metric. At the core it shows that people are not consistently applying the logic to these situations, which leaves one to question what standard they actually are using and if we are even able to have an honest conversation as long as they do not admit (or maybe even remain unaware) of the other standard.