Re:Predictive Policing Software Is Pretty Terrible at Predic...
by firebat45 on Tuesday October 03, 2023 @03:56PM
(#37756724)
>What exactly is the problem in there?
It's not that someone who is "for" something can't be objective, it's just that there is a strong likelihood that they ~aren't~ being objective. It doesn't mean an advocate doesn't have valuable perspectives, it just means that you should perhaps take them with a grain of salt.
Re:Predictive Policing Software Is Pretty Terrible at Predic...
by magicalist on Tuesday October 03, 2023 @06:42PM
(#37758587)
Everyone is "for" something, hence the ridiculous example of
> Should epidemiologists be careful to never advocate for policies that improve survival outcomes so they maintain the profile of an objective scientist?
So again I'll ask: specifically what is the "something" listed on that page[1] that would lead you to believe this person is better considered an advocate and not an "objective scientist"?
> I would not call this the profile of an objective scientist. Rather, she's an advocate.
What exactly is the problem in there? If you're for "human rights" you can't be objective? Everything else just seems to be a summary of her research results.
Should epidemiologists be careful to never advocate for policies that improve survival outcomes so they maintain the profile of an objective scientist?