Noise infusion banned from statistical products published by Census Bureau • Hacker News Board

Re: Noise infusion banned from statistical products published by Census Bureau

#71

Post by smrtinsert » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 4:12 PM UTC

thepryz wrote: post #39

xenophonf wrote: post #8

This is a gift to reactionary gerrymandering and voting restriction efforts, along with things like yesterday's FBI raid of an Ohio voting rights organization. https://www.statenews.org/government-politics/2026-06-12/ohi... Representative Joyce Beatty is from Ohio and was instrumental in stopping Trump from illegally renaming the Kennedy Center. https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/2026/06/kennedy-center-b...

Representative Beatty serves her own interests and her involvement Kennedy Center naming was just more of the same performative politics she routinely engages in. She's on the verge of being an octogenarian and missed a number of key votes, like the bill that cut funding to NPR, PBS, and other govt. programs. Kudos to her for working to remove Trump's name from the Kennedy Center but she needs to go.

The removal of his name is not performative since we're in the thick of a cult of personality president (at a bare minimum).

Re: Noise infusion banned from statistical products published by Census Bureau

#72

Post by bpt3 » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 4:13 PM UTC

tbrownaw wrote: post #43

bpt3 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replying to the ACS with accurate information is required by law, so they don't actually need to rely on people feeling safe to get answers. I don't trust the Census Bureau with my data, so if this is as "dangerous" as the author and some people here seem to think, they shouldn't be collecting it in the first place.

> Replying to the ACS with accurate information is required by law, so they don't actually need to rely on people feeling safe to get answers. This works by the same principle as how nobody ever drives faster than the speed limit.

I don't understand your point here. Are you saying compliance isn't enforced?

As someone who got an ACS survey not long ago and had no interest in completing it, it certainly appears to be.

Re: Noise infusion banned from statistical products published by Census Bureau

#73

Post by r14c » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 4:13 PM UTC

notfromhere wrote: post #58

derektank wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The entity most capable of weaponizing demographic data is the government itself. If people weren’t previously providing false information to the census, I’m skeptical that this change is what will push people over the edge.

Congress passed laws that blocked the federal government from fusing data across departments for this specific reason. the admin decided to ignore those, and a friendly congress is deciding to not act on that. You really, really don't want a government who can build a unified profile on you in that way.

Isn't the issue here the lack of accountability? Maybe an unpopular opinion, but I don't think its a foregone conclusion that governments are fundamentally corrupt. Ours certainly is and we have a very weak constitution which makes it worse, but that's the US. I think better constitutions are possible, but we have to stop treating it like a sacred document and be practical.

Re: Noise infusion banned from statistical products published by Census Bureau

#74

Post by arjie » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 4:14 PM UTC

Pretty sad, in my opinion. In my ideal the state should have visibility into the shape of the people present so that we can make good decisions about our combined organization. I think we’re making a mistake we will come to regret by intentionally damaging our data collection infrastructure.

I think a large amount of the US’s success is the result of good institutions handling granular data. Policies can be adjusted to match outcomes more rapidly than otherwise.

I understand why people decide to diminish all state capacity - they feel that governments are populated by their opponents who will use state capacity against them. But as our relative strength wanes, our ability to overcome these forces of inertia does as well. And then our governments become less capable and eventually life starts getting worse.

We don’t need house-level data immediately (except perhaps in order to place census blocks within their appropriate congressional district etc). But there are aggregation units above which we should be using as good information as we possibly could be.

Re: Noise infusion banned from statistical products published by Census Bureau

#75

Post by smrtinsert » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 4:15 PM UTC

newZWhoDis wrote: post #67

bagels wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US Government is the entity that weaponizes the data. The most obvious example is the Census Bureau compiling lists of people of Japanese descent to imprison during WWII. That's just the most obvious one that I know of without looking up more. The real push for this now is to form lists of people to disenfranchise.

Does anyone actually believe this crap? You think the census is what the government would use to mass identify and imprison people, not the NSA database(s)? You think homeland security, or the FBI, or any other alphabet agency doesn't already have access to a giant list of people? Think about what meta knows about everyone, or Google. You do realize that the US gov has read access to their core databases right? "The…

Even at a quick glance this doesn't make any sense. The census is literally how they get the data. Where else would it come from? Drones? Every computer being hacked Michael Bay style?

Re: Noise infusion banned from statistical products published by Census Bureau

#76

Post by FrustratedMonky » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 4:15 PM UTC

newZWhoDis wrote: post #67

bagels wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US Government is the entity that weaponizes the data. The most obvious example is the Census Bureau compiling lists of people of Japanese descent to imprison during WWII. That's just the most obvious one that I know of without looking up more. The real push for this now is to form lists of people to disenfranchise.

Does anyone actually believe this crap? You think the census is what the government would use to mass identify and imprison people, not the NSA database(s)? You think homeland security, or the FBI, or any other alphabet agency doesn't already have access to a giant list of people? Think about what meta knows about everyone, or Google. You do realize that the US gov has read access to their core databases right? "The…

I have to agree. I'd like Census data to be private, but the cat is out of the bag.

I'm all for keeping all of this data private. But to think it isn't already available is a bit 'head in sand'. Maybe put laws in place for 'general' privacy across all data, before getting too inflamed about Census in particular.

Re: Noise infusion banned from statistical products published by Census Bureau

#77

Post by throwawa1 » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 4:18 PM UTC

bagels wrote: post #59

asolove wrote: post #13

The replies here arguing we should publish it all are wild in the worst kind of first-order thinking way. It’s a census: it just asks questions. If you start publishing and weaponizing the data against people with various attributes, they’ll just lie or not answer. And then you are left with worse than nothing: bad data people try to act on.

The US Government is the entity that weaponizes the data. The most obvious example is the Census Bureau compiling lists of people of Japanese descent to imprison during WWII. That's just the most obvious one that I know of without looking up more. The real push for this now is to form lists of people to disenfranchise.

[flagged]

Re: Noise infusion banned from statistical products published by Census Bureau

#78

Post by SoftTalker » Sat, Jun 13, 2026, 4:19 PM UTC

glitchc wrote: post #47

SoftTalker wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why is the census asking about those attrbutes at all. The Constitution requires a count. That's it. A number. We don't need to know the rest of it, or if we do, it should be surveyed separately with voluntary participation.

> We don't need to know the rest of it, or if we do, it should be surveyed separately with voluntary participation. But we do. A detailed census is essential for making good policy. For example, knowing the age and distribution of children across the country helps local and state governments decide where to put the next school or children's hospital. The federal govt. allocates funds for education and daycare accordi…

The risks of abuse are too high and historically proven to happen eventually. There are many other ways to determine where schools and hospitals are needed, such as aggregate enrollment and admission statistics.