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

In Amazon Go, no one thinks I'm stealing

cnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 140 posts

Re: In Amazon Go, no one thinks I'm stealing

#51

Post by hkai »

tyfon wrote: post #47

I wonder how long it will take before they employ regression algorithms to screen those entering the shop and deny those deemed "not safe". They would probably be like the police crime prevention algorithms in that they would inherently be biased towards the same prejudices as the humans in such jobs. Profile a specific group of people and that group will be arrested more than those not in that group and the algorith…

It's already here. People in Xinjiang need to scan their ID to enter a supermarket.

Re: In Amazon Go, no one thinks I'm stealing

#52

Post by tyfon »

sudhirj wrote: post #49
tyfon wrote: post #47

I wonder how long it will take before they employ regression algorithms to screen those entering the shop and deny those deemed "not safe". They would probably be like the police crime prevention algorithms in that they would inherently be biased towards the same prejudices as the humans in such jobs. Profile a specific group of people and that group will be arrested more than those not in that group and the algorith…

Amazon only lets you in if they have your credit card on file - so they know your purchase history and can guess at your credit limits. It really doesn’t matter who you are, where you’re from or what you look like.

Yes, for now. I know I'm rather pessimistic, but I don't think it will stop there.

The credit card part is probably a dream scenario for banks though, to only let people into shops that have an active credit line and not accept cash.

And then you have the problem of bias towards groups of people in the credit scoring regressions.

Re: In Amazon Go, no one thinks I'm stealing

#53

Post by meowface »

hkai wrote: post #51
tyfon wrote: post #47

I wonder how long it will take before they employ regression algorithms to screen those entering the shop and deny those deemed "not safe". They would probably be like the police crime prevention algorithms in that they would inherently be biased towards the same prejudices as the humans in such jobs. Profile a specific group of people and that group will be arrested more than those not in that group and the algorith…

It's already here. People in Xinjiang need to scan their ID to enter a supermarket.

Yeah, but we all expect that sort of thing of China. The concern is mostly over it coming to the US. (I was going to say "and the UK and other places", but honestly, I would kind of expect this of the UK, too.)

Re: In Amazon Go, no one thinks I'm stealing

#54

Post by meowface »

cbg0 wrote: post #31
pentae wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, if you'd swapped out the word "Caucasian" for "African American" your post would be downvoted and you'd be called a racist. But because we're DEFINITELY not racist mentioning you targeted white people is totally fine in 2018.

As long as this is andrew_'s personal experience, I don't see why I'd call him a racist regardless of the race he profiled the most. He even goes on to explain that there's a good reason for targeting white teenagers: they were the most likely to steal something, so they weren't targeted because they're white, they were targeted because they proved to be the highest risk. Now if andrew_ had started generalizing, like…

>As long as this is andrew_'s personal experience, I don't see why I'd call him a racist regardless of the race he profiled the most. He even goes on to explain that there's a good reason for targeting white teenagers: they were the most likely to steal something, so they weren't targeted because they're white, they were targeted because they proved to be the highest risk.

Let's say that Arab men between the age of 20 and 35 were most likely to steal something when they entered the store. (Not anecdotally: let's say the location computed the demographics of thieves going back 20 years, and found a consistent trend. Let's assume it's an objective fact.) Would it be okay to target them because they proved to be the highest risk?

I think the answer is no, and I think the answer is no also in the case of white teenagers. Sometimes doing what is most effective or efficient isn't the right thing or the fair thing.

Re: In Amazon Go, no one thinks I'm stealing

#55

Post by ackidacki »

tyfon wrote: post #47

I wonder how long it will take before they employ regression algorithms to screen those entering the shop and deny those deemed "not safe". They would probably be like the police crime prevention algorithms in that they would inherently be biased towards the same prejudices as the humans in such jobs. Profile a specific group of people and that group will be arrested more than those not in that group and the algorith…

Why would it be needed? If someone enters with a credit card on file you can charge anything broken or taken out.

Re: In Amazon Go, no one thinks I'm stealing

#56

Post by cbg0 »

nielsole wrote: post #40
cbg0 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as this is andrew_'s personal experience, I don't see why I'd call him a racist regardless of the race he profiled the most. He even goes on to explain that there's a good reason for targeting white teenagers: they were the most likely to steal something, so they weren't targeted because they're white, they were targeted because they proved to be the highest risk. Now if andrew_ had started generalizing, like…

Racial profiling is being criticized despite being effective. There is an argument to be made that you shouldn't be treated differently based on the color of your skin. In fact it is e.g. in the German constitution. http://m.spiegel.de/international/germany/racial-profiling-g...

> Racial profiling is being criticized despite being effective.

You got anything to back up this blanket statement?

Re: In Amazon Go, no one thinks I'm stealing

#57

Post by barrkel »

nielsole wrote: post #40
cbg0 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as this is andrew_'s personal experience, I don't see why I'd call him a racist regardless of the race he profiled the most. He even goes on to explain that there's a good reason for targeting white teenagers: they were the most likely to steal something, so they weren't targeted because they're white, they were targeted because they proved to be the highest risk. Now if andrew_ had started generalizing, like…

Racial profiling is being criticized despite being effective. There is an argument to be made that you shouldn't be treated differently based on the color of your skin. In fact it is e.g. in the German constitution. http://m.spiegel.de/international/germany/racial-profiling-g...

What usually happens with profiling is that catch rate is out of proportion with the base rate.

For example, if blue people are twice as likely to do bad things as red people, you end up catching more than twice as many blue people when you profile based on blueness. And that's unfair discrimination. It's unfair on all the honest blue people made to feel like criminals.

And of course it's self-perpetuating. The lopsided catch rates justify profiling in the minds of people doing the catching.

In the real world, I dont know the underlying actual differences in offending rates, but I do know that correlation with life circumstances would probably be much higher than skin colour.

Re: In Amazon Go, no one thinks I'm stealing

#58

Post by matt4077 »

mattigames wrote: post #37
retsibsi wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm annoyed by some of the same things as you, but you shouldn't pretend there's not an important difference here. Racially profiling against a disadvantaged minority group with a history of appalling treatment at the hands of the majority is one thing; doing the same to members of a group with none of those characteristics is another. It's pretty obvious why one might be significantly more hurtful, offensive, contro…

So what you are saying is that profiling against a group with a history of appalling treatment at the hands of the majority is one thing, but doing the same with a different profiling is wrong, because clothing is clearly a choice but skin color is clearly not; despite being white boys raised among hundreds of people with the same clothing preference we should expect such young men to go against their surroundings an…

No, they're not saying that. Although there's a bit of merit to the idea, and it's part of the justification for choice of groups protected by anti-discrimination laws.

Here's two more arguments:

- When such profiling is actually a contradiction of the traditional, racist stereotypes, it is far easier to believe that it's actually the result of learned experience, and therefore part of an honest attempt to be effective.

- It's far less of a burden to be confronted by "unusual" stereotyping. For practical reasons, because, say, one employer not hiring you because they don't like redheads is far less of a threat to your career than a significant number thinking your gender or skin color disqualify. And, more importantly, it will cause less psychological harm. To illustrate: I'm 6 feet tall; Once, for reasons I still don't understand, someone tried to insult me as being short. Such incongruities are more likely to cause bewilderment than anger or sadness.

Re: In Amazon Go, no one thinks I'm stealing

#59

Post by Dylan16807 »

salvar wrote: post #45
andrewchambers wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People should stop talking for others when they are unelected or not nominated. Just because she feels that way, doesn't mean every black person does. Maybe many do, but I don't think it is productive to speak for other people's experience. Of course when speaking for oneself, then it is fine to say anything.

> People should stop talking for others Other people should do that you say?

Yep, that's what they said. You can read it right there in the comment.

Are you trying to imply something?

I hope you're not trying to imply hypocrisy, because saying what someone should do is not speaking for them.

Re: In Amazon Go, no one thinks I'm stealing

#60

Post by eeZah7Ux »

mattigames wrote: post #37
retsibsi wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm annoyed by some of the same things as you, but you shouldn't pretend there's not an important difference here. Racially profiling against a disadvantaged minority group with a history of appalling treatment at the hands of the majority is one thing; doing the same to members of a group with none of those characteristics is another. It's pretty obvious why one might be significantly more hurtful, offensive, contro…

So what you are saying is that profiling against a group with a history of appalling treatment at the hands of the majority is one thing, but doing the same with a different profiling is wrong, because clothing is clearly a choice but skin color is clearly not; despite being white boys raised among hundreds of people with the same clothing preference we should expect such young men to go against their surroundings an…

Yes, it's legitimate to discriminate on behavior, including dress code.

As long as it's clearly stated and not applied selectively.

Post reply on HN