Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first • Hacker News Board

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#581

Post by dang » Sat, Jun 27, 2020, 6:45 PM UTC

sfj wrote: post #442

bhntr3 wrote: post #184

The problem with predictive policing is in the name. Inference (ML) predicts the future from the past. If the past is racist, then inference will create a racist future. Since racism is systemic[1], especially when it comes to policing, predictive policing is actively working against an anti-racist future. There may be statistical ways to factor out systemic racism. There are two reasons I don't think that works: 1.…

> Since racism is systemic... Regardless of public opinion, how do we know this? Couldn't black people be just innately more violent then whites due to genetics? They certainly have dominated professional sports which indicate there are at least some differences. Wouldn't that extend to mental attributes as well, or does evolution and biology just stop at the neck? Edit: I just died... hello ghost viewers! Such wrong…

We've banned this account for doing race war on HN. Please don't create accounts to break the site rules with.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#582

Post by tick_tock_tick » Sat, Jun 27, 2020, 6:50 PM UTC

genoapol wrote: post #558

tick_tock_tick wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not convinced that systemic poverty is the cause. Plenty of poorer counties and non urban, but just a poor, areas in the USA don't have these high violent crime rates.

Most of the poor countries you mention don't have an intentionally created underclass. The economic background and the tremendous intentional income/wealth inequality in the US adds a bit more complexity. In most countries, you won't end up in jail because you make less than $X, the US penalizes being poor. The US jail population as a % of the world's total jailed population is a clear indicator. Also its quite inter…

That's a really really weird view if everyone is equally as poor people don't murder?

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#583

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jun 27, 2020, 6:56 PM UTC

bhntr3 wrote: post #184

The problem with predictive policing is in the name. Inference (ML) predicts the future from the past. If the past is racist, then inference will create a racist future. Since racism is systemic[1], especially when it comes to policing, predictive policing is actively working against an anti-racist future. There may be statistical ways to factor out systemic racism. There are two reasons I don't think that works: 1.…

[deleted]

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#584

Post by gentleman11 » Sat, Jun 27, 2020, 6:58 PM UTC

p49k wrote: post #542

OptionX wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what are the victims of violent crimes in those neighborhood do in the interim between the take resources from the already strained police departments and use them other for long-term measures? And I'm even assuming they even would have worthwhile results of course despite the premise that such programs would work is given in a matter of factly manner. Put yourself in the shoes of an innocent PoC who's house just…

People saying “defund the police” are not advocating the complete elimination of police forces; they’re advocating for the elimination of the 75-90% of things that police spend their time on that has zero or negative ROI for society. “Responding to legitimate crimes” is not one of those things.

Except the areas that are dismantling their police forces. The expression means different things to different people

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#585

Post by gentleman11 » Sat, Jun 27, 2020, 7:05 PM UTC

snowwrestler wrote: post #306

alfalfasprout wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that, in general, you're going to have biased training data (with a bias that's difficult to measure) and so inherently policing recommendations will be biased. This is particularly problematic when it comes to arrests for crimes that are inherently 'selective' in their enforcement. Eg; drug-related crimes, public intoxication, loitering, trespassing. But the fact is... violent (fatal and nonfatal) crimes do…

If we want to stop neighborhood gang violence in the long term, we need to work on why people join gangs, and what they are fighting over. We can't do that with police, who generally don't come into the situation until after it's too late and things have gone wrong. But if most of our money is going to the police, then what resources are available to do the longer-term work on gangs and neighborhoods? In software dev…

There is short term and long term crime prevention. Long term, you are absolutely, 100% right about how to decrease crime. In the short term though, it would be nice if my friends bikes would stop getting stolen and if aggressive drunk people on the local train couldn’t steal someone’s hat and then ask everyone on board “you gonna do something about it?” (neither are gang issues, I wanted to choose non-extreme but real examples).

Ideally we could spend 100% on the long term but that is impractical.

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#586

Post by gentleman11 » Sat, Jun 27, 2020, 7:14 PM UTC

lisper wrote: post #453

paragraft wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One starting observation I'd venture is those countries (and Canada) base their policing on Peelian principles, which establish a basis of policing and the relationship with the public. The US police culture had different roots. Edit: for reference, the list of principles that were issued to each new police officer in London from 1829 onward. 1. The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and dis…

The problem is that these principles work great in a homogeneous society where everyone has some kind of stake in the societal outcome. If you take people with a particular skin color and enslave them and otherwise systematically discriminate against them to varying degrees over the course of 400 years then these principles break down. It is going to take a long, long time -- probably multiple generations -- for Amer…

Just to clarify: Canada could hardly be less homogenous and it works here. We call it a “cultural mosaic.” We even have a whole French province that demands special rules. We make it work... mostly alright. Our indigenous people’s are coming out of a few centuries of rough treatment though and there is a large and public reconciliation effort being made by the government and by many institutions. Hopefully the future will be better in that area

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#587

Post by monksy » Sat, Jun 27, 2020, 7:34 PM UTC

stallmanite wrote: post #574

monksy wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It got shut down. It sounds bad but you have to remember how violent some of the areas get on the West and South side (Garflied Park W+E, and Engelwood are all within the top 5)

So the black site is somehow justified by the fact that there is crime in the area? This makes no sense. The black site is itself illegal and an example of lawlessness. How is an Abu Gharib clone helping solve the gamg problem? Did Abu Gharib really help out the efforts in Iraq?

Not justifying it. I'm suggesting that it came to be over a lack of resources and people tried to adapt to what they could do to solve the problem.

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#588

Post by monksy » Sat, Jun 27, 2020, 7:36 PM UTC

MuffinFlavored wrote: post #534

monksy wrote: post #457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the reasons is: They can't trust the police to come out and take the people who cause trouble out. Neighbourhood gangs, esp in chicago are territorial and they try to "protect the neighbourhoods." (I think they do cause more problems) This came up during the riots earlier this month. The police were stretched way too thin. Gangs did stop the looters and rioters from extending into their neighbourhoods. (Deeper…

why don’t they protect their neighborhoods from murder/drugs/fraud on a daily basis?

My thought is that they're like Uber they do the bare minimum enough to justify and recruit and then just do what they want.

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#589

Post by tehjoker » Sat, Jun 27, 2020, 7:44 PM UTC

kortilla wrote: post #131

tehjoker wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In practice, it's a method of entrenching racist practice. Certain groups are profiled and criminalized, and therefore have criminal records so more police are sent to predicted "hot zones" which results in a feedback loop. What is never said is that crimes are socially determined. Which is more harmful? Shoplifting by a poor person or wage theft by a business owner? Clearly the latter as an actual person who can't a…

Wage theft is treated as a civil issue because it’s not actually “theft” despite its name. It’s not a business taking money away from someone, it’s the business failing to pay money for a contractual obligation. Do you want a failure to pay your plumber to be prosecuted as theft?

This is kind of what I was talking about. Why do you think paying the plumber is optional?

Re: Santa Cruz, California bans predictive policing in U.S. first

#590

Post by sosborn » Sat, Jun 27, 2020, 7:46 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #572

lifeformed wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are there actual, current examples of systemic racism where an entirely non-racist staff would still produce racially-based biased outcomes? If you removed all racists from the economy, black people as a demographic would still be at a huge disadvantage for a very long time (or forever?). The playing field might not level on it's own. If a system starts out with biased functions and runs long enough so that the dis…

Your idea of "justice" is based upon group membership, as unfortunately for many other people. I see absolutely no difference between a poor white person vs. a poor black person. Sure, there might be more poor black people, but so what? Do you seriously believe that rich white people would actively be trying to help poor white people and not poor black people? No, everybody wants riches for themselves, poor whites ar…

> I've never received any benefit

You have, it is just that these benefits are so ingrained in society that you didn't notice. That's what people mean when they talk about systemic issues.