3 ms·
I feel like 0.01% is one of the more dangerous levels of false positives. Widespread use would result in far more than 10,000 tests resulting in the near certa
by Lerc 3y ago
I feel like 0.01% is one of the more dangerous levels of false positives. Widespread use would result in far more than 10,000 tests resulting in the near certainty that innocent people would be accused. The moderately low false positive rate would then be leaned on to imply guilt.
You might find for every 10,000 tests you get around 151 targets. For each one individually you can say they probably did it, but cumulatively you can say that one of them is probably innocent.
Consider using two positives. Do schools and universities generate 100,000,000 essays per year? Sure would suck for that innocent person tagged as having a one in a hundred million chance of not being guilty.
- google234123 3y agoNothing is perfect, I wish more things had 1 in a hundred million certainty. Is our police this effective? Are the current plagiarism checks used in school this accurate?
- int_19h 3y agoThat kind of thing is easy to handwave away when it does not affect you personally. No, our justice system is probably not that effective either. But that is also a problem, so why should we create more problems like that instead of fixing the ones that we already have?
- google234123 3y agoSo we can’t replace current systems unless the replacement is absolutely perfect? How perfect is turn it in?
- int_19h 3y agoIf the current systems are even worse, we should throw those out. TurnItIn specifically is horrible and should have never been a thing