The Minority Report a Reality!!!!!!!!!

[Martinus]

It sounds like law enforcement 101. Nobody is talking about putting people in jail preemptively, like in the Minority Report - but good intel should clearly be one of the biggest parts of both crime prevention and crime investigation.

[CountDeMoney]

This isn't about good intel;  it's about Compstat and making the numbers fit.  Anything that ports over to law enforcement the very same methodologies that are breaking everything else (Six Sigma, etc.) should be a clue.

Want good intel?  Get the cops out of their cars, walk their beats, know their neighborhoods, learn the streets the old-fashioned way.  Fuck Compstat.  Goddamned Vietnam Whiz Kids bodycounting bullshit.

[DGuller]

Computer models don't replace human judgment, they supplement it.

[derspiess]

This isn't about good intel;  it's about Compstat and making the numbers fit.  Anything that ports over to law enforcement the very same methodologies that are breaking everything else (Six Sigma, etc.) should be a clue.

Want good intel?  Get the cops out of their cars, walk their beats, know their neighborhoods, learn the streets the old-fashioned way.  Fuck Compstat.  Goddamned Vietnam Whiz Kids bodycounting bullshit.

And get rid of them goddamned Glocks and go back to the humble, trusty .38 revolver, amirite??

[The Minsky Moment]

This isn't about good intel;  it's about Compstat and making the numbers fit.  Anything that ports over to law enforcement the very same methodologies that are breaking everything else (Six Sigma, etc.) should be a clue.

Want good intel?  Get the cops out of their cars, walk their beats, know their neighborhoods, learn the streets the old-fashioned way.  Fuck Compstat.  Goddamned Vietnam Whiz Kids bodycounting bullshit.

Preach it, Brother Seedy.  The naysayers just Don't Get It.

Check at figure 32 on this Presidential report.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/page/files/20160423_cea_incarceration_criminal_justice.pdf

US has more than 150% more corrections officers than other countries.  Same amount of prosecutors, a few less judges.
But 34.6% fewer police officers.

That's the reality of modern US law enforcement.  Fight crime by grabbing any "risky" person and warehouse them in jail.

[Berkut]

The GOP seems to think the problem is that we don't put enough people in prison. Cotton actually said that we have a "under-incarceration problem".

[Razgovory]

Is this a principle you believe, in regards to law enforcement?

Can you just do the gotcha part without the question?

Gotcha.

[The Brain]

The GOP seems to think the problem is that we don't put enough people in prison. Cotton actually said that we have a "under-incarceration problem".

Do you dispute that people are prison insecure?

[DGuller]

But 34.6% fewer police officers.

Quality, not quantity.

[Jacob]

Computer models don't replace human judgment, they supplement it.

... in many cases computer models justify executives and senior management overriding the judgement of experienced people based on numbers they can make fit their own preconceptions.

Which I guess is just a longer rephrasing of what you just said

[DGuller]

Computer models don't replace human judgment, they supplement it.

... in many cases computer models justify executives and senior management overriding the judgement of experienced people based on numbers they can make fit their own preconceptions.

Which I guess is just a longer rephrasing of what you just said

No, that's not really it at all.

Humans have certain advantages over algorithms.  But they also have their cognitive biases and limitations on the amount of data they can process, so algorithms have certain advantages over humans.  If you don't want to be a fossil who gets left behind in the age of algorithms, you need to recognize this fact and focus on learning how you can augment algorithms most effectively.

[The Minsky Moment]

The algorithm can only be as good s the quality of the info going in and if the automation is being used as a justification for cutting the human budget you are in GIGO.  Also how does when verify the model without running into problems of reverse causality?  I.e. the algorithm targets certain at risk people, who are then subject to certain interventions which may in turn lead them to asocial responses.

[DGuller]

The algorithm can only be as good s the quality of the info going in and if the automation is being used as a justification for cutting the human budget you are in GIGO. 

The issue of data quality is both vastly underemphasized and vastly overemphasized at the same time.  People who never built models generally don't appreciate just how crappy real life data is.  That said, people who never built models also don't appreciate how models built on imperfect data can still be useful, just not as useful.  Which can still be a whole lot more useful than no model at all.

Also how does when verify the model without running into problems of reverse causality?  I.e. the algorithm targets certain at risk people, who are then subject to certain interventions which may in turn lead them to asocial responses.

You validate the model when you build it, not after deploying it.  And you have causation issues any time you want to intervene in something or prevent something, so if you're concerned about that, crime fighting is not for you.

[Jacob]

No, that's not really it at all.

Humans have certain advantages over algorithms.  But they also have their cognitive biases and limitations on the amount of data they can process, so algorithms have certain advantages over humans.  If you don't want to be a fossil who gets left behind in the age of algorithms, you need to recognize this fact and focus on learning how you can augment algorithms most effectively.

I think what I've been exposed to is people who talk the talk you just talked there, and who wielded spreadsheets and data to advance their arguments; but they have done so in areas where the proper application of algorithms is not well understood or where they themselves have no real understanding of the data they are wielding.

... cargo-cult and/or management fad applications of algorithms, as it were.

[DGuller]

No, that's not really it at all.

Humans have certain advantages over algorithms.  But they also have their cognitive biases and limitations on the amount of data they can process, so algorithms have certain advantages over humans.  If you don't want to be a fossil who gets left behind in the age of algorithms, you need to recognize this fact and focus on learning how you can augment algorithms most effectively.

I think what I've been exposed to is people who talk the talk you just talked there, and who wielded spreadsheets and data to advance their arguments; but they have done so in areas where the proper application of algorithms is not well understood or where they themselves have no real understanding of the data they are wielding.

... cargo-cult and/or management fad applications of algorithms, as it were.

Yes, models can be dangerous in the hands of people with little knowledge.  So can chainsaws, but that doesn't mean we should go back to using axes.