Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Courts are using risk-assessment software to sentence criminals

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 90 posts

Re: Courts are using risk-assessment software to sentence criminals

#71

Post by logfromblammo »

macNchz wrote: post #45
michaelt wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Special GPSes for truckers are available from companies like TomTom and Garmin. If truckers are choosing to save a few hundred bucks by using their smartphones, which don't have the trucker-specific features, surely the fault lies with the trucker for using a consumer-grade product, not with the consumer-grade product for not being professional-grade?

A truck GPS is extremely helpful if you're driving a commercial vehicle any appreciable distance in an unfamiliar place. They include many additional data points in routing: vehicle height for overpass clearance, vehicle weight for bridges, "No Trucks"/"Passenger Cars Only"/"No Commercial Vehicles" restrictions etc. You can get yourself into hot water if you're following car GPS directions with even a mid-sized U-Hau…

You're already in hot water with a U-Haul. Anecotally, they have been the worst cargo vehicle rental business in my life. Get a truck from Budget, Hertz, or Penske instead. Every friend whom I have helped with their move has experienced a mechanical failure of some kind with a U-Haul vehicle that significantly increased the stress of an already stressful event.

Know your clearance and pay attention to road signs. Your regular car insurance may cover rental cars, but it probably doesn't cover rental trucks. So if you peel your top on a low underpass, you may find yourself in a world of pain and regret for a long time. Ideally, if you are in a rental truck, you should already know how to get where you are going without GPS assistance.

Re: Courts are using risk-assessment software to sentence criminals

#72

Post by bmh_ca »

hackuser wrote: post #68
bmh_ca wrote: post #9

I wonder if the algorithm is evidence-based, and learns from the results of prior decisions. In which case it is possible it would eventually discover that in the USA incarceration is very strongly linked to recidivism. It follows that the algorithm might refuse to incarcerate many convicts. Which is arguably exactly what the algorithm should do, namely what politicians will/can not: employ evidence to advance the me…

> what the algorithm should do, namely what politicians will/can not It's dangerous to imagine that the algorithms won't be used just as politically as anything else. The difference is, instead of a mostly transparent process in a legislature, the decisions will be made between powerful people and software developers.

As someone who has drafted legislation, I can say with some confidence that if the only difference is the introduction of software programmers, that is positive as they are - on whole - more likely to bear a sense of reason and popular morality than those writing legislation right now.

With the introduction of explicit algorithms we also hopefully will have the advantage of better data collection, which arguably can make it harder to justify changes that operate in contrast to stated principles. (Contrast much legislation that serves purposes entirely orthogonal to their stated intent - and which survive because of the lack of data and accountability that would reveal their abject failures at all but their ulterior motives)

Re: Courts are using risk-assessment software to sentence criminals

#73

Post by hackuser »

bmh_ca wrote: post #72
hackuser wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> what the algorithm should do, namely what politicians will/can not It's dangerous to imagine that the algorithms won't be used just as politically as anything else. The difference is, instead of a mostly transparent process in a legislature, the decisions will be made between powerful people and software developers.

As someone who has drafted legislation, I can say with some confidence that if the only difference is the introduction of software programmers, that is positive as they are - on whole - more likely to bear a sense of reason and popular morality than those writing legislation right now. With the introduction of explicit algorithms we also hopefully will have the advantage of better data collection, which arguably can…

> software programmers, that is positive as they are - on whole - more likely to bear a sense of reason and popular morality than those writing legislation right now

Any time we think some group of people is going to be naturally above human frailties, we are wrong; it never works. We find software programmers to be more reasonable because they are more like us, and also we are imagining ideal hypothetical developers - plenty of real ones should be nowhere near making laws for others.

Everything is ultimately politics. If there is power in algorithms, then those who desire to influence things will influence the algorithms. It's just a less transparent mechanism.

Re: Courts are using risk-assessment software to sentence criminals

#74

Post by stevenalowe »

Even if the software was statistically perfect and somehow immune to our cultural biases, it should still not be used. An individual stands before the judge, not a statistical demographic group. The probability of an imaginary statistical individual's recidivism is irrelevant; what is relevant is the current state of that individual. Relying on statistical models is both lazy and unfair

Re: Courts are using risk-assessment software to sentence criminals

#75

Post by khana »

"Last summer, the state supreme court ruled against Loomis, reasoning that knowledge of the algorithm’s output was a sufficient level of transparency"

I hope this mentality doesn't make it up to the federal Supreme Court. This is definitely a faulty argument presented by the state to be sure.

Re: Courts are using risk-assessment software to sentence criminals

#77

Post by Fjolsvith »

helthanatos wrote: post #42
dsfyu404ed wrote: post #21

>While this can be the fastest route, the GPS’s algorithm does not concern itself with factors important to truckers carrying a heavy load, such as the 43’s 1,300-foot elevation drop over four miles with two sharp turns. I know this is somewhat off topic but the lack of advanced options for GPS routing is such a PITA. It would be trivial to add check-boxes for things like: "I'm towing a trailer, don't make me take du…

Google maps normally gives you a few routes and you can choose the best. You can avoid highways, tolls, and ferries. You can preview all your turns. You can add stops if you want. I don't believe Google maps has many weather suggestions, but there are apps to check the whether. I've found Google maps to be better than any built-in GPS in my cars.

I deliver sheds I build, and I use Windria to see which way the wind is blowing to find out the best time to travel with them.

Re: Courts are using risk-assessment software to sentence criminals

#78

Post by kakarot »

mattnewton wrote: post #13
rayiner wrote: post #8

> These algorithmic outputs inform decisions about bail, sentencing, and parole. Each tool aspires to improve on the accuracy of human decision-making that allows for a better allocation of finite resources. It's really not clear to me that much is gained from having very precise decisions made about bail and sentencing. Trying to predict the future is a fool's errand, whether a judge does it or a computer. It'd be b…

I don't disagree it could be much better and based on something other than arbitrary nonsense, but these guides are designed to bring consistency to sentences within the same jurisdiction which would make them fairer than completely arbitrary judge sentences. At least everyone is subject to the same arbitrary nonsense guidelines instead of the mood and familiarity of the judge.

Except that in practice, we are still subject to a judge's mood and familiarity.

I am still trying to clear myself of a wrongful conviction, a misdemeanor for which I was given the maximum allowed sentence of six months in county jail, that was given to me, in spite of blatant inconsistency across half a dozen witness reports and 2 years of court battles, because the judge said, "I think you are lying" and was angry that he had to see me so many times and I didn't just take a plea deal like a good little citizen.

And I wish I was an exception. But this happens everywhere and I doubt the presiding judge could even recount half of these guidelines. It's all arbitrary.

Re: Courts are using risk-assessment software to sentence criminals

#79

Post by macNchz »

logfromblammo wrote: post #71
macNchz wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A truck GPS is extremely helpful if you're driving a commercial vehicle any appreciable distance in an unfamiliar place. They include many additional data points in routing: vehicle height for overpass clearance, vehicle weight for bridges, "No Trucks"/"Passenger Cars Only"/"No Commercial Vehicles" restrictions etc. You can get yourself into hot water if you're following car GPS directions with even a mid-sized U-Hau…

You're already in hot water with a U-Haul. Anecotally, they have been the worst cargo vehicle rental business in my life. Get a truck from Budget, Hertz, or Penske instead. Every friend whom I have helped with their move has experienced a mechanical failure of some kind with a U-Haul vehicle that significantly increased the stress of an already stressful event. Know your clearance and pay attention to road signs. You…

Indeed, I used U-Haul as kind of generic word for rental truck here, but I much prefer Penske if I'm renting a truck. They have fewer locations but their trucks are clearly better maintained.

Re: Courts are using risk-assessment software to sentence criminals

#80

Post by Sacho »

advisedwang wrote: post #49
mproy wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" ... other correlated factors will allow the algorithm to continue to enforce this racism" Which correlated factors are you thinking of?

Some proxies for race: - Where somebody lives - Their name - What sports teams somebody supports - Their finances - consumer preferences - education level - what medical conditions somebody has - political leanings I'm not saying these factors can't legitimately be used in a risk assessment, but they could be used to make a good bet on race.

Finances? While it is true that blacks and native americans have the highest poverty rates, if you take a random poor person they are about 50% more likely to be white than black. Same with the many of your other "proxies". Therefore they would be a poor bet for race.

If you were using these proxies to identify the race of a person jailed for a crime, they might be good predictors, but only marginally more useful than just blindly guessing black, since they constitute the majority of incarcerated people.

I think, by attempting to remove the smoke screens a "real racist" would use, you give them a new one - "look, our opponents want to ignore actual data".

Post reply on HN