3 ms·
I see both sides here. My main concern with this approach is the false sense of security it might create. In my experience , the separation of cities into "good
by daviddoran 15y ago
I see both sides here. My main concern with this approach is the false sense of security it might create. In my experience , the separation of cities into "good" and "bad" areas is only valid in aggregate. I'd rather someone took precautions and stayed alert than happily sauntered through an area that the app told them was safe. I guess it's difficult to know if this strategy works, since you'll never know if you avoided a would-be encounter with a mugger.
With that said, I can't fault your motivations, and building it so quickly was a real achievement!
- govind201 15y agoHmm, I see your point regarding conveying a "false sense of security". If the research that I spoke of turns out to be encouraging, I'll be sure to add explicit warnings and instructions. A private beta to test users' perceptions is on the cards too. If there's anyone out there with experience in sociology, I'd be glad to have a chat.
- RobAtticus 15y agoI agree, and can also see both sides here. However, in my experience, I find myself finding the same information in a less efficient way. When I'm going to Baltimore or Philly (the two cities I'm most familiar with), I'll ask people what areas I should visit and which areas I should avoid. It would be nice to have this "wisdom" distilled into an app, at least to give me a broad overview. Certainly I shouldn't feel invincible in "good" areas, but as a non-intimidating person, it would be nice to not accidentally put myself in a bad situation. Obviously in cities like Baltimore or Philly it's not a good idea to walk alone late at night, regardless of which street you're on, but there definitely are some places worse than others.