[HN Gopher] Sentenced by Algorithm
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Sentenced by Algorithm
        
       Author : prostoalex
       Score  : 25 points
       Date   : 2021-08-02 02:59 UTC (20 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.nybooks.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.nybooks.com)
        
       | Nasrudith wrote:
       | Really thoughts for the topic remain as always: stop letting the
       | people in power pass the buck to the algorithim. That is the
       | entire purpose of those algorithms as implemented in the real
       | world as opposed to some pie in the sky theorist - letting them
       | escape responsibility.
       | 
       | I will also note that algorithimic sentencing existed before
       | computers with sentencing guidelines.
        
       | vinsci wrote:
       | Actually, the headline could be more technically correct written
       | as "sentenced by algorithm executing on backdoored remotely
       | controlled computer", as that is the case today.
       | 
       | Enjoy your dystopia of greed, fraud, and injustice.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | onos wrote:
       | It seems the appropriate method to judge this approach is in
       | comparison to the baseline referenced at the start: humans making
       | "black box" judgement calls that are subject to the individual
       | judge's biases. If the computer programmed decision making were
       | (already is?) transparent, then we could critique it and work to
       | ensure something resembling fair is encoded.
        
         | ljm wrote:
         | How would you define 'fair'? I've a few examples, gathered from
         | being alive and hearing what other people think for a few
         | decades.
         | 
         | 1. It's fair to punish someone else if you let another off the
         | hook
         | 
         | 2. It's fair to treat someone more harshly if you don't like
         | what they've done
         | 
         | 3. It's fair to turn the other cheek because they're a friend
         | 
         | 4. It's fair to treat someone differently because of where they
         | came from or their skin colour
         | 
         | 5. It's fair to give someone a pass because they did you a
         | favour
         | 
         | 6. It's fair to be unfair because you owe someone a favour
         | 
         | 7. It's unfair to be a victim who doesn't get justice
         | 
         | 8. It's unfair to be an innocent person who is prosecuted for
         | someone else's crime
         | 
         | 9. It's unfair to not get what you wait
         | 
         | 10. It's fair to get what you want
         | 
         | You will find a variation of all of these examples across the
         | world right now.
         | 
         | The point is, fairness is loaded with bias and therefore any
         | algorithm that tries to deal with 'fairness' is going to
         | inherit the bias of those who designed it.
        
           | nickthemagicman wrote:
           | You make really good points. Life is bizarre and human
           | culture is extremely contradictory and difficult to quantify.
           | 
           | And what's worse our definition of 'fair' maybe advancing
           | just like culture is constantly advancing.
           | 
           | African Americans may have been treated poorly by the
           | algorithm back in the 1700s when they we're considered less
           | than a full person by the legal system for example. And maybe
           | in the future drug offenses may be considered not a big deal.
           | 
           | They call the Constitution a living document.
           | 
           | This algorithm may have to be a living algorithm.
           | 
           | What if it was open source and constantly updated and
           | reviewed to reach consensus?
           | 
           | There would probably also have to be human appeal processes.
           | 
           | I definitely think this is intriguing as a first-level
           | sentencing determination though.
        
             | ljm wrote:
             | > African Americans may have been treated poorly by the
             | algorithm back in the 1700s
             | 
             | Fucking hell, man.
        
         | geephroh wrote:
         | "Computer programmed decision making" is anything but
         | transparent currently. Just look at the example of Northpointe,
         | Inc.'s COMPAS ("Correctional Offender Management Profiling for
         | Alternative Sanctions") tool, which purports to measure
         | recidivism risk. Even under threat of lawsuit, Northpointe
         | refused to reveal the underlying source because it is a
         | "protected trade secret."[1]
         | 
         | Are judges biased? Of course, and that is not acceptable.
         | However, the answer is not to surrender our system of justice
         | to unaccountable commercial actors.
         | 
         | 1. https://www.uclalawreview.org/injustice-ex-machina-
         | predictiv...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-08-02 23:00 UTC)