6 ms·

Pretty lousy argument. Firstly, the majority of inmates in the US are white (58%). I'd assume mug shot stats are similar, or at the very least not mostly black

by rrego 8y ago

Pretty lousy argument. Firstly, the majority of inmates in the US are white (58%). I'd assume mug shot stats are similar, or at the very least not mostly black people. Moreover, if a algorithm enforces bias to the detriment of inoccents, it's a bad algorithm

andrewguenther 8y ago
> Firstly, the majority of inmates in the US are white (58%). I'd assume mug shot stats are similar, or at the very least not mostly black people. I actually did not know this. Thank you. I had conflated incarceration rate with inmate population. If anyone is curious for a source, see here: https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_race.jsp https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_race.... > Moreover, if a algorithm enforces bias to the detriment of inoccents, it's a bad algorithm I agree with this 100%. But they haven't provided enough information about their dataset to make this conclusion. If they provided enough information for someone to independently analyze the data and reproduce the experiment, I would flip immediately.
Kalium 8y ago
> Pretty lousy argument. Firstly, the majority of inmates in the US are white (58%). I'd assume mug shot stats are similar, or at the very least not mostly black people. Personally, I would assume the mugshots are a random sample of a public corpus, and thus likely 35-40% people of color. Which is definitely skewed from the background population. I'm assuming the similarity of 40% is a coincidence. > Moreover, if a algorithm enforces bias to the detriment of inoccents, it's a bad algorithm Is it? It sounds like it might be working exactly as it was set up and specified to work. I would call that the fault of the designers and specifiers, rather than the algorithm. It's a good algorithm. It fits its purpose well. Its purposes just happen to be completely evil.

by rrego 8y ago

andrewguenther 8y ago

> Firstly, the majority of inmates in the US are white (58%). I'd assume mug shot stats are similar, or at the very least not mostly black people. I actually did not know this. Thank you. I had conflated incarceration rate with inmate population. If anyone is curious for a source, see here: https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_race.jsp https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/statistics_inmate_race.... > Moreover, if a algorithm enforces bias to the detriment of inoccents, it's a bad algorithm I agree with this 100%. But they haven't provided enough information about their dataset to make this conclusion. If they provided enough information for someone to independently analyze the data and reproduce the experiment, I would flip immediately.

Kalium 8y ago

> Pretty lousy argument. Firstly, the majority of inmates in the US are white (58%). I'd assume mug shot stats are similar, or at the very least not mostly black people. Personally, I would assume the mugshots are a random sample of a public corpus, and thus likely 35-40% people of color. Which is definitely skewed from the background population. I'm assuming the similarity of 40% is a coincidence. > Moreover, if a algorithm enforces bias to the detriment of inoccents, it's a bad algorithm Is it? It sounds like it might be working exactly as it was set up and specified to work. I would call that the fault of the designers and specifiers, rather than the algorithm. It's a good algorithm. It fits its purpose well. Its purposes just happen to be completely evil.