6 ms·

Sorry for my potential lack of understanding to what you are saying. But people don't think in terms in stereotypes because they don't look into distribution. Y

Sorry for my potential lack of understanding to what you are saying. But people don't think in terms in stereotypes because they don't look into distribution. You can still look at a distribution of people and form a stereotype because for most people and most cases you cannot form good enough sample to represent any significant statistics to draw any conclusions in everyday life interactions. And in the case of BLM. I am not deeply involved with following what the development of the movement but I think at it core (at least when it was formed) is because statistically speaking, you are more likely to be killed by police id you are black. If you look at US prison distribution per capita and race, you can draw a similar conclusion. Stereotypes are a cause not an effect. You get some of that in part because some people are racist and have racial stereotypes. And it is great that you are saying everyone should be treated as a unit itself. But we all know what this is not the case when you have a significant portion of the people think of people from their lens of stereotypes., Black peoole, muslims, Asians, Jews..etc and this have real consequences on the life of this people. Good luck telling an TSA officer that you should treat me as individual and don't pick me "randomly" because I have have the wrong color to not be suspicious.

cm2187 3y ago
For the BLM, the stats actually support that you are slightly less likely to be killed by the police if you are black. But there are vastly more interactions of black people with the police, and those are aligned with crimes committed, including crimes which stats are unlikely to be affected by policing practice (eg murders). Now we can debate why the black population commits more crime, but it’s not a racist policing discussion. But it’s even more mundane things. People are focusing on extreme percentiles of distributions, like % of engineers at google, or board members of major companies, ie looking at 0.001%-ish percentiles, where even minor differences in distributions may have a dramatic effect. And this leads to people reacting to this with “so you are saying that women engineers at google are less capable” (read many times on HN during the google memo controversy) which is absolutely not what those differences in distribution mean. They just mean you may see more of one group and less of another, but if the recruitment process is fair, all the people who passed the threshold are equally capable. And then you have to compare that to the distribution of people who actually apply, which has its own biases.
- bluish29 3y ago
  > For the BLM, the stats actually support that you are slightly less likely to be killed by the police if you are black I think you meant more likely not "less". And even in thay case, this [1] is statistics up to before covid that shows that it is actually 3 times ratio between black and white risk of being killed by a police. This does not constitute "slightly". > But there are vastly more interactions of black people with the police, and those are aligned with crimes committed, including crimes which stats are unlikely to be affected by policing practice (eg murders). That would be true of any race or group of people. They have much more interactions with police other than those which will result in death. > People are focusing on extreme percentiles of distributions, like % of engineers at google, or board members of major companies, ie looking at 0.001%-ish percentiles, where even minor differences in distributions may have a dramatic effect Yes, and that's actually how personal stereotypes works. Your experience with people is very limited to form an opinion about race, nationality...etc. It is not even extreme percentile like top or bottom but it is a small percentage that people use to build their opinions. > but if the recruitment process is fair, all the people who passed the threshold are equally capable If the process involve human judgment or evaluation, then biases start to be a huge factor that prevents establishing a clear threshold. Unless you have something like a standard exam that will be taken without human interactions. You will always be working under the assumption that the process is not 100% fair. That is actually hard problem to solve especially at big companies. I don't know a solution that can give the best outcome and I don't envy people who have to do it. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewalsh/2021/09/30/study-us-police-killings-have-increased-since-1980---and-black-americans-face-the-highest-risk-of-death/?sh=7eb706b65b3b https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewalsh/2021/09/30/study-us-po...
- growingkittens 3y ago
  > Now we can debate why the black population commits more crime, but it’s not a racist policing discussion. Criminal statistics are a record of who is arrested and prosecuted, not a record of who commits the most crime. If a black criminal is more likely to be arrested than a white criminal, then the statistics will reflect that.
  - 3y ago
viraptor 3y ago
> Stereotypes are a cause not an effect. They're both. Some are a cause, others like for example "black people can't swim" are an effect of racist laws. Changing how you treat a group creates its own set of stereotypes. Then you can also get a multilayered stereotype pile from things like cake walk.

cm2187 3y ago

For the BLM, the stats actually support that you are slightly less likely to be killed by the police if you are black. But there are vastly more interactions of black people with the police, and those are aligned with crimes committed, including crimes which stats are unlikely to be affected by policing practice (eg murders). Now we can debate why the black population commits more crime, but it’s not a racist policing discussion. But it’s even more mundane things. People are focusing on extreme percentiles of distributions, like % of engineers at google, or board members of major companies, ie looking at 0.001%-ish percentiles, where even minor differences in distributions may have a dramatic effect. And this leads to people reacting to this with “so you are saying that women engineers at google are less capable” (read many times on HN during the google memo controversy) which is absolutely not what those differences in distribution mean. They just mean you may see more of one group and less of another, but if the recruitment process is fair, all the people who passed the threshold are equally capable. And then you have to compare that to the distribution of people who actually apply, which has its own biases.

bluish29 3y ago
> For the BLM, the stats actually support that you are slightly less likely to be killed by the police if you are black I think you meant more likely not "less". And even in thay case, this [1] is statistics up to before covid that shows that it is actually 3 times ratio between black and white risk of being killed by a police. This does not constitute "slightly". > But there are vastly more interactions of black people with the police, and those are aligned with crimes committed, including crimes which stats are unlikely to be affected by policing practice (eg murders). That would be true of any race or group of people. They have much more interactions with police other than those which will result in death. > People are focusing on extreme percentiles of distributions, like % of engineers at google, or board members of major companies, ie looking at 0.001%-ish percentiles, where even minor differences in distributions may have a dramatic effect Yes, and that's actually how personal stereotypes works. Your experience with people is very limited to form an opinion about race, nationality...etc. It is not even extreme percentile like top or bottom but it is a small percentage that people use to build their opinions. > but if the recruitment process is fair, all the people who passed the threshold are equally capable If the process involve human judgment or evaluation, then biases start to be a huge factor that prevents establishing a clear threshold. Unless you have something like a standard exam that will be taken without human interactions. You will always be working under the assumption that the process is not 100% fair. That is actually hard problem to solve especially at big companies. I don't know a solution that can give the best outcome and I don't envy people who have to do it. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewalsh/2021/09/30/study-us-police-killings-have-increased-since-1980---and-black-americans-face-the-highest-risk-of-death/?sh=7eb706b65b3b https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewalsh/2021/09/30/study-us-po...
growingkittens 3y ago
> Now we can debate why the black population commits more crime, but it’s not a racist policing discussion. Criminal statistics are a record of who is arrested and prosecuted, not a record of who commits the most crime. If a black criminal is more likely to be arrested than a white criminal, then the statistics will reflect that.
- 3y ago

viraptor 3y ago

> Stereotypes are a cause not an effect. They're both. Some are a cause, others like for example "black people can't swim" are an effect of racist laws. Changing how you treat a group creates its own set of stereotypes. Then you can also get a multilayered stereotype pile from things like cake walk.