How to get rid of gerrymandering: the math is surprising

Re:How to get rid of gerrymandering: the math is surprising by samatman on Thursday May 12, 2022 @07:00AM (#31352174)

I think you're wrong. An algorithm which will produce the same results every time you feed a set of numbers into it is objective.

I don't respect your attempt to make objective mean something it doesn't.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How to get rid of gerrymandering: the math is surprising by minkzilla on Thursday May 12, 2022 @10:37AM (#31354852)

I think the two of you are using two different but legitimate definitions. GP is not trying to make it mean something it doesn't.

1. Existing independent of or external to the mind;

2. actual or real. Based on observable phenomena; empirical.

3. Uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices: synonym: fair.

For an example, I write an algorithm to use different seeds and distance functions for the Voronoi diagram to find the one that benefits Republicans the most. It would be deterministic and maybe objective in definition 1 and 2 but it would not fit definition 3. I would say it is heavily influenced by personal prejudice, just one step removed because it is the coders prejudice not the algorithms.

[ Parent | on HN ]