Neural Network Learns to Identify Criminals by Their Faces

[Eddie Teach]

Social status correlates with the curve of your upper lip? 

Aristos keep theirs stiff.

[DontSayBanana]

The correlation seems real enough. 

Sure.  Between convicts and social status.  It only holds if you're naive enough to assume that everyone that commits a crime is convicted, and that social status plays no part in conviction rates.

[DGuller]

The correlation seems real enough. 

Sure.  Between convicts and social status.  It only holds if you're naive enough to assume that everyone that commits a crime is convicted, and that social status plays no part in conviction rates.

I was just pointing out that, as usual, you were saying things authoritatively that were completely false.  Correlation either exists or doesn't, interpretation doesn't enter into it.

[DontSayBanana]

I was just pointing out that, as usual, you were saying things authoritatively that were completely false.  Correlation either exists or doesn't, interpretation doesn't enter into it.

What things did I say "authoritatively that were completely false?"  Content validity is that it measures what it's supposed to measure- since not all criminals are convicts (additionally, not all convicts are criminals, but that's a completely different rant), saying that this measures criminality because it identifies convicts is demonstrably false.

[DGuller]

What things did I say "authoritatively that were completely false?"

The problem with this is that it's a false correlation.

Unless the researchers doctored the study or were grossly negligent in the technical details of their study, the correlation they found is real.  Just like the correlation of the number of pot holes and flu cases is real.

[DontSayBanana]

Unless the researchers doctored the study or were grossly negligent in the technical details of their study, the correlation they found is real.  Just like the correlation of the number of pot holes and flu cases is real.

No, the correlation between these photos and felon status is real; the correlation between these photos and criminality is not- it's a claim made with mountains of evidence to the contrary already sitting there.

[DGuller]

Unless the researchers doctored the study or were grossly negligent in the technical details of their study, the correlation they found is real.  Just like the correlation of the number of pot holes and flu cases is real.

No, the correlation between these photos and felon status is real; the correlation between these photos and criminality is not- it's a claim made with mountains of evidence to the contrary already sitting there.

That's a pretty extraordinary claim to make.  The legal system has to be perfectly random in its actions for this claim to actually be true.  I think even in Saddam Hussein's Iraq there was some correlation between conviction status and criminality.

[CountDeMoney]

Wonder if this neural network can recognize my snail drawing

lol, stupid internet tests.

[CountDeMoney]

And in a completely unrelated development, DGuller is being more of a Russian pseudoscience knucklehead than usual.  Bet you guys didn't see that correlation coming.

[DontSayBanana]

That's a pretty extraordinary claim to make.  The legal system has to be perfectly random in its actions for this claim to actually be true.  I think even in Saddam Hussein's Iraq there was some correlation between conviction status and criminality.

Not at all.  The legal system just has to be shown not to have a direct correlation, so here are some counter-examples that law is applied unevenly among different social statuses:

• Pre-trial intervention, expungement, and "second chance" programs that heavily weigh the candidate's social status to determine their likely future social contribution.
  
• Income (which is correlated to social status) and quality of legal representation.  Rule of law means accepting the loopholes as well as accepting the law- law firms with offices on three continents and hundreds of paralegals are just more likely to find them than an underfunded public defender's office.
  
• Juror bias - jurors will feel more responsibility and pressure to dilute punishment towards a socially similar defendant than one that's dissimilar- they won't hold back on outcasts.
  
  All three of these effects are empirically provable, and all three chip away at the correlation between criminality and felon status.

[The Brain]

That's a pretty extraordinary claim to make.  The legal system has to be perfectly random in its actions for this claim to actually be true.  I think even in Saddam Hussein's Iraq there was some correlation between conviction status and criminality.

Not at all.  The legal system just has to be shown not to have a direct correlation, so here are some counter-examples that law is applied unevenly among different social statuses:

• Pre-trial intervention, expungement, and "second chance" programs that heavily weigh the candidate's social status to determine their likely future social contribution.
  
• Income (which is correlated to social status) and quality of legal representation.  Rule of law means accepting the loopholes as well as accepting the law- law firms with offices on three continents and hundreds of paralegals are just more likely to find them than an underfunded public defender's office.
  
• Juror bias - jurors will feel more responsibility and pressure to dilute punishment towards a socially similar defendant than one that's dissimilar- they won't hold back on outcasts.
  
  All three of these effects are empirically provable, and all three chip away at the correlation between criminality and felon status.
  

[DGuller]

All three of these effects are empirically provable, and all three chip away at the correlation between criminality and felon status.

Now you're saying something substantially different.  There is a big difference between something chipping away at the correlation and something completely removing it.  The argument you made in the previous post is only valid if the correlation is completely removed.  Correlation is not algebra, counter-examples don't invalidate it, only weaken it.

[CountDeMoney]

All three of these effects are empirically provable, and all three chip away at the correlation between criminality and felon status.

You know what else chips away at the correlation between criminality and felon status?  Pleading down to a misdemeanor.

[DontSayBanana]

All three of these effects are empirically provable, and all three chip away at the correlation between criminality and felon status.

Now you're saying something substantially different.  There is a big difference between something chipping away at the correlation and something completely removing it.  The argument you made in the previous post is only valid if the correlation is completely removed.  Correlation is not algebra, counter-examples don't invalidate it, only weaken it.

Are you joking? Between uncaught criminals and criminals treated differently by the system, I can't imagine there being an R value of more than 0.55 or so. Maybe, just maybe if the system was rock solid before, 0.6, and I wouldn't be putting any crime prevention programs into place with under a 0.75. Hell, I wouldn't want less than a 0.8.

[DGuller]

All three of these effects are empirically provable, and all three chip away at the correlation between criminality and felon status.

Now you're saying something substantially different.  There is a big difference between something chipping away at the correlation and something completely removing it.  The argument you made in the previous post is only valid if the correlation is completely removed.  Correlation is not algebra, counter-examples don't invalidate it, only weaken it.

Are you joking? Between uncaught criminals and criminals treated differently by the system, I can't imagine there being an R value of more than 0.55 or so. Maybe, just maybe if the system was rock solid before, 0.6, and I wouldn't be putting any crime prevention programs into place with under a 0.75. Hell, I wouldn't want less than a 0.8.

Let's assume for the moment that your numbers are correct.  Have you noticed how all of these numbers appear to be significantly greater than zero?