3 ms·
If you don't care about reducing false negatives, then the ideal policy is simply to abolish prisons because that results in zero falsely imprisoned people.
by TheCoelacanth 4y ago
If you don't care about reducing false negatives, then the ideal policy is simply to abolish prisons because that results in zero falsely imprisoned people.
- rfrey 4y agoThey said they don't think it's essential to reduce false negatives, presumably from current levels. That's quite different than your reducto ad absurdum.
- caminante 4y agoWell, GP/"they" didn't do a good job being clear. They laid out two scenarios with 5 people stealing candy. A. 0% false positive; 40% false negative B. 20% false positive; 20% false negative (or maybe 4 people convicted with 1 innocent.) Either way, the false negative % decreased, and it seemed like the point was that they viewed A as morally superior (at the expense of higher false negatives). Overall, sure. You don't have to necessarily decrease the false negative rate, however, it's something that ideally doesn't go up, all else equal.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]