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

SBF Arrested by Bahamian Authorities

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

871–880 of 886 posts

Re: SBF Arrested by Bahamian Authorities

#871

Post by godelski »

yucky wrote: post #870
godelski wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) What's the have to do with the conversation? 2) That's not how logic works. Correlation does not equate to causation.

I agree that correlation doesn't equal causation, I pointed it out because it's the exact same argument used to decry racial disparities in the criminal justice system. Either the argument is valid, or it isn't. We can't pick and choose when it fits our beliefs.

You're still oversimplifying things. A large reason people get confused between correlation and causation[0] but rather things that are correlated and connected with a confounder. The problem here is oversimplifying the model. You have to ask a lot more whys. It is fact that men are arrested more than women and fact that black men are arrested more often, as a percentage, than white men. But it is naive to assume that the "man" variable or the "black" variable are causal variables. In fact they are confounders.

The argument isn't either "valid or not" in a general sense. The argument needs more nuance and if that's your concern, ask for it and point out where it is lacking. Demand better comments instead of trying a quick mic drop.

[0] Most people aren't confused with spurious correlations like: US technology funding vs number of hangings. (99.8% correlated) http://tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

Re: SBF Arrested by Bahamian Authorities

#872

Post by yucky »

godelski wrote: post #871
yucky wrote: post #870

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that correlation doesn't equal causation, I pointed it out because it's the exact same argument used to decry racial disparities in the criminal justice system. Either the argument is valid, or it isn't. We can't pick and choose when it fits our beliefs.

You're still oversimplifying things. A large reason people get confused between correlation and causation[0] but rather things that are correlated and connected with a confounder. The problem here is oversimplifying the model. You have to ask a lot more whys. It is fact that men are arrested more than women and fact that black men are arrested more often, as a percentage, than white men. But it is naive to assume tha…

For what it's worth, I agree with you. But if you've ever discussed racial disparities in anything you know that asking for more information that might not fit neatly with the established narrative, is likely to just get you called a Nazi or something.

Re: SBF Arrested by Bahamian Authorities

#873

Post by godelski »

yucky wrote: post #872
godelski wrote: post #871

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're still oversimplifying things. A large reason people get confused between correlation and causation[0] but rather things that are correlated and connected with a confounder. The problem here is oversimplifying the model. You have to ask a lot more whys. It is fact that men are arrested more than women and fact that black men are arrested more often, as a percentage, than white men. But it is naive to assume tha…

For what it's worth, I agree with you. But if you've ever discussed racial disparities in anything you know that asking for more information that might not fit neatly with the established narrative, is likely to just get you called a Nazi or something.

I think you're exaggerating this. No one is going to call you a Nazi for saying that Black men have a lower ability to climb the socioeconomic ladder through traditional legal means and thus have a propensity to seek out other non-legal means. Many seeking social justice will stand by that actually. But you will get called a Nazi if you suggest that the reason for them doing this is because they are black (note: capitalization is subtle but important). That is eugenics and has been disproved.

See how the causal factors in these arguments are different? The former is a demonstration of an unfair set of opportunities that disproportionately affects a certain subset of humans while the latter says that the arrests are destined because of genetic makeup. We know one is true and the other is false.

If you're making arguments akin to the former and getting called a Nazi, get off Twitter and touch some grass. Talk to some real people. Specifically people of color. But maybe listen first before you open your mouth.

Re: SBF Arrested by Bahamian Authorities

#874

Post by yucky »

godelski wrote: post #873
yucky wrote: post #872

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what it's worth, I agree with you. But if you've ever discussed racial disparities in anything you know that asking for more information that might not fit neatly with the established narrative, is likely to just get you called a Nazi or something.

I think you're exaggerating this. No one is going to call you a Nazi for saying that Black men have a lower ability to climb the socioeconomic ladder through traditional legal means and thus have a propensity to seek out other non-legal means. Many seeking social justice will stand by that actually. But you will get called a Nazi if you suggest that the reason for them doing this is because they are black (note: capi…

If you use that argument to explain away property crime differences, maybe. But that doesn't hold for violent crime rate disparities, which is typically where these conversations go off the rails.

Re: SBF Arrested by Bahamian Authorities

#875

Post by godelski »

yucky wrote: post #874
godelski wrote: post #873

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're exaggerating this. No one is going to call you a Nazi for saying that Black men have a lower ability to climb the socioeconomic ladder through traditional legal means and thus have a propensity to seek out other non-legal means. Many seeking social justice will stand by that actually. But you will get called a Nazi if you suggest that the reason for them doing this is because they are black (note: capi…

If you use that argument to explain away property crime differences, maybe. But that doesn't hold for violent crime rate disparities, which is typically where these conversations go off the rails.

Maybe if that is happening then the problem is you're talking about apples when others are talking about oranges. They're both round fruits and share a lot of similarities so it is easy to get the two confused. Especially with human language where we have a lot of priors that fill in the tremendous gaps in our compressed language. It is even more problematic with hot topics, which is why I suggested listening first. If there is a failure to communicate then maybe change the means in which you are communicating. This should also prod you to listen better. Remember that in communicating you're trying to express this complex idea with a limited vocabulary and time. The listener then has to decompress and interpret this information based on what you said (not what you are thinking) combined with their prior experiences (including the similarity of your argument to arguments made by others. Possibly others you don't wish to associate who are instead dog whistling or using malinformation). So do your best to communicate well and specifically with your target audience but also ensure that you are doing your best to interpret the intended message of those you are communicating with. Not only will the latter help make a more productive conversation, but demonstrating this helps encourage others to do the same in return. Not to say that we aren't human and won't make quick quips. But if we can re-navigate these situations, they do tend to turn out better. I think this conversation between us is a good demonstration of that.

Re: SBF Arrested by Bahamian Authorities

#876

Post by jcampbell1 »

singleshot_ wrote: post #836
jcampbell1 wrote: post #615

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She is getting the leniency from the sentencing reform act of 1984 which is predicated on cooperation. No way prosecutors have given her a damn thing. Yes, many cases use snitches because that is the only way to win the case, but it is fraught with peril because of the obvious incentive to lie. Prosecutors avoid deals, and sentencing guidelines already provide for leniency for cooperation. When it is all over, they m…

Out of perhaps an over abundance of curiosity, what would be your take on, say, Massachusetts Rules of Evidence Section 1104? What sorts of things do you think Massachusetts would promise a witness?

They don’t make specific promises except as a last resort because of things like 1104. I know a specific example of the feds losing a case because they granted immunity to get someone to fly to the US to testify. The witness completely blew the prosecution’s case. A federal prosecutor losing is quite the stain on their reputation. Immunity deals are the fastest way to blow a case.

The witness is supposed to say they cooperated because the law provides lighter sentences for those who cooperate voluntarily.

Re: SBF Arrested by Bahamian Authorities

#877

Post by yucky »

godelski wrote: post #875
yucky wrote: post #874

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you use that argument to explain away property crime differences, maybe. But that doesn't hold for violent crime rate disparities, which is typically where these conversations go off the rails.

Maybe if that is happening then the problem is you're talking about apples when others are talking about oranges. They're both round fruits and share a lot of similarities so it is easy to get the two confused. Especially with human language where we have a lot of priors that fill in the tremendous gaps in our compressed language. It is even more problematic with hot topics, which is why I suggested listening first.…

You assume good intentions with these people, that is not what has been on display for the last few years. A general rule of thumb is that anybody engaged in identity politics is a horrible human being, and discussion with them is generally an exercise in futility.

These are people who literally start every discussion with the idea that people of different races should be treated differently based on the color of their skin. So I suspect they're projecting a bit, since that is precisely Nazi ideology cloaked in a different skin (literally).

Re: SBF Arrested by Bahamian Authorities

#878

Post by godelski »

yucky wrote: post #877
godelski wrote: post #875

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe if that is happening then the problem is you're talking about apples when others are talking about oranges. They're both round fruits and share a lot of similarities so it is easy to get the two confused. Especially with human language where we have a lot of priors that fill in the tremendous gaps in our compressed language. It is even more problematic with hot topics, which is why I suggested listening first.…

You assume good intentions with these people, that is not what has been on display for the last few years. A general rule of thumb is that anybody engaged in identity politics is a horrible human being, and discussion with them is generally an exercise in futility. These are people who literally start every discussion with the idea that people of different races should be treated differently based on the color of the…

> You assume good intentions with these people

Yes, because if we don't, then it does lead to what's been on display (which is also a selection bias). Start with the assumption of good intentions, but you don't have to keep that after they play their hand.

> A general rule of thumb is that anybody engaged in identity politics is a horrible human being, and discussion with them is generally an exercise in futility.

I found the problem. If you treat everyone you meet like an asshole or terrible person then it is no wonder they respond that way. You can't expect anyone to be nice to you if you are being a dick to them. People can tell what you think of them. You probably aren't as good of a bluff as you think you are.

Re: SBF Arrested by Bahamian Authorities

#879

Post by yucky »

godelski wrote: post #878
yucky wrote: post #877

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You assume good intentions with these people, that is not what has been on display for the last few years. A general rule of thumb is that anybody engaged in identity politics is a horrible human being, and discussion with them is generally an exercise in futility. These are people who literally start every discussion with the idea that people of different races should be treated differently based on the color of the…

> You assume good intentions with these people Yes, because if we don't, then it does lead to what's been on display (which is also a selection bias). Start with the assumption of good intentions, but you don't have to keep that after they play their hand. > A general rule of thumb is that anybody engaged in identity politics is a horrible human being, and discussion with them is generally an exercise in futility. I…

Well there is an easy way to test this theory of yours, by answering a question. Do you think we should treat people differently based on the color of their skin?

I happen to think we should treat everyone the same regardless of skin color. Do you?

Re: SBF Arrested by Bahamian Authorities

#880

Post by godelski »

yucky wrote: post #879
godelski wrote: post #878

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You assume good intentions with these people Yes, because if we don't, then it does lead to what's been on display (which is also a selection bias). Start with the assumption of good intentions, but you don't have to keep that after they play their hand. > A general rule of thumb is that anybody engaged in identity politics is a horrible human being, and discussion with them is generally an exercise in futility. I…

Well there is an easy way to test this theory of yours, by answering a question. Do you think we should treat people differently based on the color of their skin? I happen to think we should treat everyone the same regardless of skin color. Do you?

I'm not taking the bait. I just want you to know that the reason you're having problems with people is because you're arrogant. Tone it down if you want to have the conversations you want to have because you're never going to get there the way you're going about it. That's the end of this conversation for me. Sorry.
Post reply on HN