Algorithms should have made courts more fair. What went wrong?

Kentucky Judges must consult algorithms for cash bail decisions; now more whites get bail.


Read the whole story

 

[Jim Z]

I think this is a pretty fascinating article, for two big reasons:

1) It's a rare case where the algorithm appears to actually do what it's supposed to, at least to some degree - it did increase releases without bail in the (predominantly white) regions where it was more consistently applied. It's the people who are the problem here, not the computers.

2) It makes it really, really obvious which commentors didn't actually read the article.

It's definitely revealing a lot about the biases of Ars readers, which weirdly (for a technology site) seems to be anti-tech-solutions these days.

we're not "anti-tech solutions." We're anti-tech solutions that don't work. We're not all a bunch of geeks who think anything more technical is automatically better no matter how deeply flawed it is.

 

[Jim Z]

Algorithms aren't magic. They carry the biases of whoever coded them, good or bad.

So if there isnt careful thought to how the algorithm is constructed and who is constructing it, the age old phrase still applies.

Garbage in, garbage out.

Either that or the statistics actually say that blacks have a larger flight or no show risk.

Algorithms are no PC and that may be an obvious problem for some in this age.

I see the problem. What you think is “PC” is really just people telling you to be less of a shithead, and that gives you the sads.

 

[Jim Z]

Why come read news at Ars if all they do is post articles from other news sources ?

One or two articles from Wired on weekends is not “all they do,” dumbshit. What the hell is your problem?