4 ms·
> ... but it certainly won't have the reach of putting the feature in people's phones. I think this may be another job for Bayes. Apple's algorithm may be very
by arcticbull 3y ago
> ... but it certainly won't have the reach of putting the feature in people's phones.
I think this may be another job for Bayes. Apple's algorithm may be very accurate at detecting car crashes when there are car crashes, but most of the time there are not car crashes. As a result it may actually be super inaccurate at the 'population' level. So while it may have the reach, the incidence of false positives and the infrastructure misallocation may yield worse outcomes than not having the system in the first place.
- noodlesUK 3y ago> I think this may be another job for Bayes. Definitely. I think it is difficult to assess the scale of the issue here without any raw numbers. In terms of resource allocation, this quote in the article seems to suggest that they weren't so stretched thin that they had any issues. >Our employees really stepped up, as first responders always do really step up in the line of duty and they did. And we didn’t have any situation where we couldn’t help someone because of the amount of calls.
- raverbashing 3y agoYeah at some point Apple will have to make the calculation actual lives saved vs. useless dispatches of emergency services A good individual idea not always turns out to be great when taken at a population level
- alvarezbjm-hn 3y agoIs apple paying for the false alarms? I assume they aren't (They aren't in the saving lives bussiness) I suppose they have no motive for this: "Apple will have to make the calculation actual lives saved vs. useless dispatches"