4 ms·

You were misled. From the paper: "we report racial and socioeconomic disparities without attempting to control for other covariates." [1] https://dl.acm.org/do

by verteu 3y ago

You were misled. From the paper: "we report racial and socioeconomic disparities without attempting to control for other covariates." [1] https://dl.acm.org/doi/fullHtml/10.1145/3593013.3594020 https://dl.acm.org/doi/fullHtml/10.1145/3593013.3594020

policepost 3y ago
Misled implies a degree of intent, the wording is ambiguous but I don't assume ill intent by the author, especially when they later spend a paragraph explaining why they did not slice by covariates.
- LudwigNagasena 3y ago
  It is either purposefully misleading or unreasonably reckless. It is obviously ambiguous and screams of ragebait. I wanted to punch my monitor and fire the author of article when I read this sentence because it is just inflammatory racebait.
  - policepost 3y ago
    You should consider checking your humors or mediate or something, because wanting to do violence because of some Internet text is not healthy human behavior.
    - LudwigNagasena 3y ago
      Inciting race hate is not healthy human behavior. Getting mad at someone who incites race hate is perfectly healthy IMO.
- verteu 3y ago
  I'm referring to the author of the article (not the paper), who included no such explanation.
aiisjustanif 3y ago
Let’s also quote why “We report racial and socioeconomic disparities without attempting to control for other covariates. First, if New York City residents of different races face different levels of police deployments, that disparate impact is itself important; it can also bias algorithms trained on downstream policing data irrespective of the true causal mechanism. Second, controlling for other factors in policing data can be difficult to interpret, introducing concerns about omitted variable bias and model misspecification which make it difficult to identify which factor is truly the “cause” of higher police deployments. For the sake of transparency and simplicity, therefore, we report results by stratifying each variable separately, noting that these disparities are themselves important but that multiple causal mechanisms may underlie them.”

by verteu 3y ago

policepost 3y ago

Misled implies a degree of intent, the wording is ambiguous but I don't assume ill intent by the author, especially when they later spend a paragraph explaining why they did not slice by covariates.

LudwigNagasena 3y ago
It is either purposefully misleading or unreasonably reckless. It is obviously ambiguous and screams of ragebait. I wanted to punch my monitor and fire the author of article when I read this sentence because it is just inflammatory racebait.
- policepost 3y ago
  You should consider checking your humors or mediate or something, because wanting to do violence because of some Internet text is not healthy human behavior.
  - LudwigNagasena 3y ago
    Inciting race hate is not healthy human behavior. Getting mad at someone who incites race hate is perfectly healthy IMO.
verteu 3y ago
I'm referring to the author of the article (not the paper), who included no such explanation.

aiisjustanif 3y ago

Let’s also quote why “We report racial and socioeconomic disparities without attempting to control for other covariates. First, if New York City residents of different races face different levels of police deployments, that disparate impact is itself important; it can also bias algorithms trained on downstream policing data irrespective of the true causal mechanism. Second, controlling for other factors in policing data can be difficult to interpret, introducing concerns about omitted variable bias and model misspecification which make it difficult to identify which factor is truly the “cause” of higher police deployments. For the sake of transparency and simplicity, therefore, we report results by stratifying each variable separately, noting that these disparities are themselves important but that multiple causal mechanisms may underlie them.”