![]() |
Re: Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.
Quote:
You are an interesting and intelligent person. Why do you need to play this troll? If you can't give up this act, then please go away and never come back. Honestly, I'd rather see this board die than read this sort of shit anymore. Grow up or leave. |
Re: Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.
Quote:
|
Re: Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.
Quote:
How about just looking back to see what I said the last 50 times you posted the same damn thing? |
Re: Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.
Quote:
|
Re: Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.
Quote:
|
Re: Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.
Quote:
|
For Sebby
|
Also for Sebby
|
Re: For Sebby
Quote:
Of course, most of those studies happened before we had a black president. it's all better now, right? |
Re: For Sebby
Quote:
I think lawsuits over discrimination-by-algorithm are going to become more frequent and much larger in the next few decades. Jumping off a bit, management and governance from the "helicopter view" are going to make a shit show of society, and I don't see any hope of us stopping it. There's a delusion being bought by almost all people with power that huge organizations, markets, and even countries can be fully understood and managed by viewing mere data about how they operate in aggregate.* This thinking isn't irrational, of course, but we don't have to look far to see its Achilles Heel - the 2008 Crash. The aggregate data never provide a complete picture of what's going on at the street level. God only knows how much damage and unknown risk we'll cause by applying such know-it-all-ism and total reliance on necessarily blunt data in realms beyond finance and insurance. ______ *Wall Street would tell us otherwise, but their broad analyses only appear accurate because its all the same self-reinforcing data passed back and forth between and among the same limited actors, upon which those actors engage in herd investing, the timing of which creates profits. You don't have to have accurate data to win at musical chairs. |
Re: For Sebby
Quote:
Huh? The whole point of the studies discussed in the article was that there were no differences attributable to "big data" or "algorithm," but only differences in race (based on skin color or names). |
Re: For Sebby
Quote:
|
Re: For Sebby
Quote:
- Tom Edge, director, Southern Foodways Alliance |
Re: For Sebby
Quote:
But, the downside is, programmed admissions tend to be less diverse and not as prone to pick out the intellectual. Your quota of white suburbanites don't tend to be the ones who are interesting and quirky, but instead ones who know how to game the system to deliver numbers without having real intrinsic interest. They all play a varsity sport, but one without as much competition from the real jocks (e.g., sailing team or fencing club), they have great grades in easy classes, they have enough extracurriculars but not too many... I think the only real solution is to carefully hire weirdos as admissions officers, but I'm not anticipating that any time soon. The Dangerfields don't want to have their little snookums go back to their alma mater and discover that its being represented by Zeebo and Wiploc. |
Re: For Sebby
Quote:
Certainly some things that are predictive will correlate with race (or other historically disadvantaged classes) but others will not, leaving the black people who do not have those characteristics at least arguably better off. "We won't lend do you because we have a lot of data showing you're a bad credit risk" is a different problem than "we won't lend to you because you're black" and, if the data's really there, substantially less unfair and arbitrary. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:29 PM. |
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com