4 ms·

It’s unfortunate that, at least in California, silver alerts are bundled with amber alerts. The volume of silver alerts was so high (several a week) that I turn

by harles 3y ago

It’s unfortunate that, at least in California, silver alerts are bundled with amber alerts. The volume of silver alerts was so high (several a week) that I turned them off which also turned off amber alerts. I have to wonder what the cost/benefit tradeoff is when blasting out an alert to a couple million people. Some of those folks will be driving or in others situations where a full volume unmutable alert is a safety risk.

klabb3 3y ago
Iirc amber alerts aren’t great either, and have big unintended consequences, possibly to the point where it does more harm than good. I remember reading a long article about it, but can’t seem find it right now unfortunately.
- bee_rider 3y ago
  Amber alerts are to help prevent child abductions, right? The “more harm” from the unintended consequences would have it be pretty bad to compete with that.
  - hackernewds 3y ago
    Save 1 child, crash 10 old people is a classic trail/railroad ethical dilemma. Arguably it's not settled conclusion
    - bee_rider 3y ago
      I haven’t gotten one in ages (I’m beginning to wonder if maybe they are much less popular in the Northeast for some reason). So I forget, do they respect phone settings like “driving mode, do not disturb?”
  - Broken_Hippo 3y ago
    No, they don't prevent anything. In theory, they are to help find a child that has already been abducted and they think is in immediate danger. Being abducted, by itself, isn't enough to get an alert. And IIRC, they don't do that very well. It isn't a system that is standardized across the US and some places cut down on the number of alerts because it causes distracted drivers (which cause accidents and whatnot) and the public has started to tune them out. On top of this, brains are flawed, and aren't always good at "look for this stranger for 5 minutes while driving and hearing your child cry".
    - jstarfish 3y ago
      > In theory, they are to help find a child that has already been abducted and they think is in immediate danger. Being abducted, by itself, isn't enough to get an alert. The bar for Amber Alerts has been pretty low since its inception. I stopped paying attention myself once it became apparent they were being used to deputize the public as repo men for custodial abductions. Parents who murder their children usually don't kidnap them first-- unless the responders force escalation and standoff (see also: the police-chase debate). Settle that shit in court and stop being dramatic. It's only as of earlier this year that [in California at least] the criteria are being revisited to eliminate custody disputes as a qualifier. Though CA/AZ/NM/TX have added risk of such abductions becoming international affairs, which is the only concession I'd make for such histrionics. The system does work though, as does the FBI most-wanted list.
    - ianburrell 3y ago
      The problem with amber alerts is that they alert as if they were a hurricane. Phones seem to have one kind of emergency alert. Frequent amber alerts devalues the emergency alert that should be saved for imminent danger. It causes people to turn off amber alerts or even worse all alerts. Amber alerts would work much better as a notification. A beep, a notification popup, easy to swipe away. They should be closer to weather alert.
  - harles 3y ago
    The problem is disproportionate scale. At what point is an amber alert likely to cause more harm than good. Is notifying 2m people likely to cause at least one accident? How about every person in the country? The real issue I have isn’t the missing child alerts (it’s not clear they’re helpful, but sure, for the kids), it’s that the system has been diluted with silver alerts and the whole thing is bundled together. When I switched off the alerts, I was receiving 20-50 silver alerts for every amber alert. I just can’t imagine how such a system creates more good than harm. And from an engineering perspective, why is a “stop the world” notification rather than a “look out for this old person” notification? Someone isn’t being actively kidnapped.
  - klabb3 3y ago
    I’ve lived long enough to see that indeed unintended consequences can absolutely outweigh even the most compassionate of intentions. “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.” Of course, I don’t think Amber alerts are the worlds biggest problem. But if you have one person (the child) vs possibly millions of people (the alerted people) you don’t need that much negative consequences to outweigh the benefits. Add in the fact that the perp is alerted as well, and that the chance of saving a child from violence is already low.

by harles 3y ago

klabb3 3y ago

Iirc amber alerts aren’t great either, and have big unintended consequences, possibly to the point where it does more harm than good. I remember reading a long article about it, but can’t seem find it right now unfortunately.

bee_rider 3y ago
Amber alerts are to help prevent child abductions, right? The “more harm” from the unintended consequences would have it be pretty bad to compete with that.
- hackernewds 3y ago
  Save 1 child, crash 10 old people is a classic trail/railroad ethical dilemma. Arguably it's not settled conclusion
  - bee_rider 3y ago
    I haven’t gotten one in ages (I’m beginning to wonder if maybe they are much less popular in the Northeast for some reason). So I forget, do they respect phone settings like “driving mode, do not disturb?”
- Broken_Hippo 3y ago
  No, they don't prevent anything. In theory, they are to help find a child that has already been abducted and they think is in immediate danger. Being abducted, by itself, isn't enough to get an alert. And IIRC, they don't do that very well. It isn't a system that is standardized across the US and some places cut down on the number of alerts because it causes distracted drivers (which cause accidents and whatnot) and the public has started to tune them out. On top of this, brains are flawed, and aren't always good at "look for this stranger for 5 minutes while driving and hearing your child cry".
  - jstarfish 3y ago
    > In theory, they are to help find a child that has already been abducted and they think is in immediate danger. Being abducted, by itself, isn't enough to get an alert. The bar for Amber Alerts has been pretty low since its inception. I stopped paying attention myself once it became apparent they were being used to deputize the public as repo men for custodial abductions. Parents who murder their children usually don't kidnap them first-- unless the responders force escalation and standoff (see also: the police-chase debate). Settle that shit in court and stop being dramatic. It's only as of earlier this year that [in California at least] the criteria are being revisited to eliminate custody disputes as a qualifier. Though CA/AZ/NM/TX have added risk of such abductions becoming international affairs, which is the only concession I'd make for such histrionics. The system does work though, as does the FBI most-wanted list.
  - ianburrell 3y ago
    The problem with amber alerts is that they alert as if they were a hurricane. Phones seem to have one kind of emergency alert. Frequent amber alerts devalues the emergency alert that should be saved for imminent danger. It causes people to turn off amber alerts or even worse all alerts. Amber alerts would work much better as a notification. A beep, a notification popup, easy to swipe away. They should be closer to weather alert.
- harles 3y ago
  The problem is disproportionate scale. At what point is an amber alert likely to cause more harm than good. Is notifying 2m people likely to cause at least one accident? How about every person in the country? The real issue I have isn’t the missing child alerts (it’s not clear they’re helpful, but sure, for the kids), it’s that the system has been diluted with silver alerts and the whole thing is bundled together. When I switched off the alerts, I was receiving 20-50 silver alerts for every amber alert. I just can’t imagine how such a system creates more good than harm. And from an engineering perspective, why is a “stop the world” notification rather than a “look out for this old person” notification? Someone isn’t being actively kidnapped.
- klabb3 3y ago
  I’ve lived long enough to see that indeed unintended consequences can absolutely outweigh even the most compassionate of intentions. “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.” Of course, I don’t think Amber alerts are the worlds biggest problem. But if you have one person (the child) vs possibly millions of people (the alerted people) you don’t need that much negative consequences to outweigh the benefits. Add in the fact that the perp is alerted as well, and that the chance of saving a child from violence is already low.