5 ms·

You make really good points. Life is bizarre and human culture is extremely contradictory and difficult to quantify. And what's worse our definition of 'fair

You make really good points. Life is bizarre and human culture is extremely contradictory and difficult to quantify. And what's worse our definition of 'fair' maybe advancing just like culture is constantly advancing. African Americans may have been treated poorly by the algorithm back in the 1700s when they we're considered less than a full person by the legal system for example. And maybe in the future drug offenses may be considered not a big deal. They call the Constitution a living document. This algorithm may have to be a living algorithm. What if it was open source and constantly updated and reviewed to reach consensus? There would probably also have to be human appeal processes. I definitely think this is intriguing as a first-level sentencing determination though.

ljm 5y ago
> African Americans may have been treated poorly by the algorithm back in the 1700s Fucking hell, man.
- nickthemagicman 5y ago
  ?
  - fidesomnes 5y ago
    You did not demonstrate enough navel gazing and bemoaning of original sin all non people of color are guilty of. If I knew were you worked I could have you fired.
- claylevering 5y ago
  ...YIKES.
  - nickthemagicman 5y ago
    ?
- CyanBird 5y ago
  I completely fail to see what's the issue with what OP said, care to explain? It is completely accurate, algorithms are built by people whom live inmersed on their own temporary and geographically atomized cultures, just look at modern supposed ""unbiased"" algorithms used to ""prevent crime"", it is just racial biases baked in
  - nickthemagicman 5y ago
    I am super confused as well. Lol. This website is really strange.
    - ZephyrBlu 5y ago
      I suspect the "may have" is what set people off.
      - nickthemagicman 5y ago
        Thanks for letting me know. So strange. The 'algorithm' is the noun object of the preposition. Not society or history . Is modern English education really that poor? Or is there purposeful misinterpretation in order to be offended? I just don't get it.
        rincebrain 5y ago
        When I read it, as a native speaker, I read "treated poorly by the algorithm" as being a term for the behavior of culture and systems of the time, and not a hypothetical algorithm from the future that took as input the culture of the time and made decisions about fairness. I think it was the use of "the algorithm" and not "an algorithm" that most affected my reading there - "poorly by an algorithm" comes across, to me, as "poorly by some algorithm", rather than "poorly by _the_ algorithm", implying a specific instance of a thing, already known by the reader or referred back to later, doing it. Consider "treated poorly by the system" versus "treated poorly by such a system", which has an even clearer connotation, to me.
- jeffypoo 5y ago
  Your outrage radar is a little too sensitive pal.
  - crooked-v 5y ago
    You don't see any problem with the "may have"?
    - tdeck 5y ago
      I think what OP meant is "if the algorithm were designed (or perhaps implemented) in the 1700s according to standards of fairness held by those in power at that time, then it might have treated African Americans unfairly (despite being an algorithm)". I'm not a mind reader but that seems to make some sense given the context of the discussion.
      - jarcane 5y ago
        You don't have to go back to the 1700s to find African Americans being treated poorly by the judicial system. It's a weird shifting of the sands that isn't necessary to the conversation, when the context is a subject that is causing real harm now.
        nickthemagicman 5y ago
        That supports my point even more. If certain groups of people are being treated poorly in modern times then an algorithm that sentences people would possibly include that bias as well. Is that statement offensive to you?
        masklinn 5y ago
        > If certain groups of people are being treated poorly in modern times then an algorithm that sentences people would possibly include that bias as well. I’d even change the word “would” to “will” as that has already occurred time and again. I think you two are violently agreeing with one another, but misunderstanding one another as well.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

ljm 5y ago

> African Americans may have been treated poorly by the algorithm back in the 1700s Fucking hell, man.

nickthemagicman 5y ago
?
- fidesomnes 5y ago
  You did not demonstrate enough navel gazing and bemoaning of original sin all non people of color are guilty of. If I knew were you worked I could have you fired.
claylevering 5y ago
...YIKES.
- nickthemagicman 5y ago
  ?
CyanBird 5y ago
I completely fail to see what's the issue with what OP said, care to explain? It is completely accurate, algorithms are built by people whom live inmersed on their own temporary and geographically atomized cultures, just look at modern supposed ""unbiased"" algorithms used to ""prevent crime"", it is just racial biases baked in
- nickthemagicman 5y ago
  I am super confused as well. Lol. This website is really strange.
  - ZephyrBlu 5y ago
    I suspect the "may have" is what set people off.
    - nickthemagicman 5y ago
      Thanks for letting me know. So strange. The 'algorithm' is the noun object of the preposition. Not society or history . Is modern English education really that poor? Or is there purposeful misinterpretation in order to be offended? I just don't get it.
      - rincebrain 5y ago
        When I read it, as a native speaker, I read "treated poorly by the algorithm" as being a term for the behavior of culture and systems of the time, and not a hypothetical algorithm from the future that took as input the culture of the time and made decisions about fairness. I think it was the use of "the algorithm" and not "an algorithm" that most affected my reading there - "poorly by an algorithm" comes across, to me, as "poorly by some algorithm", rather than "poorly by _the_ algorithm", implying a specific instance of a thing, already known by the reader or referred back to later, doing it. Consider "treated poorly by the system" versus "treated poorly by such a system", which has an even clearer connotation, to me.
jeffypoo 5y ago
Your outrage radar is a little too sensitive pal.
- crooked-v 5y ago
  You don't see any problem with the "may have"?
  - tdeck 5y ago
    I think what OP meant is "if the algorithm were designed (or perhaps implemented) in the 1700s according to standards of fairness held by those in power at that time, then it might have treated African Americans unfairly (despite being an algorithm)". I'm not a mind reader but that seems to make some sense given the context of the discussion.
    - jarcane 5y ago
      You don't have to go back to the 1700s to find African Americans being treated poorly by the judicial system. It's a weird shifting of the sands that isn't necessary to the conversation, when the context is a subject that is causing real harm now.
      - nickthemagicman 5y ago
        That supports my point even more. If certain groups of people are being treated poorly in modern times then an algorithm that sentences people would possibly include that bias as well. Is that statement offensive to you?
        masklinn 5y ago
        > If certain groups of people are being treated poorly in modern times then an algorithm that sentences people would possibly include that bias as well. I’d even change the word “would” to “will” as that has already occurred time and again. I think you two are violently agreeing with one another, but misunderstanding one another as well.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]