Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NBC News)   California may replace cash bail with algorithms, word problems   (nbcnews.com) divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

2033 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Oct 2020 at 9:50 AM (5 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



67 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-10-21 8:41:18 AM  
Some fear the change will worsen anti-Black discrimination.

Discrimination against anti-Blacks?  Discrimination by anti-Blacks?  Kind of a weird sentence structure there, Sparky.

/Kind of like "restricted to unauthorized personnel" vs "restricted to authorized personnel."  The reader probably knows what you intended, but...
 
2020-10-21 9:52:05 AM  
Algo Rithm is my synth band alter ego.
 
2020-10-21 9:53:10 AM  

Dr.Fey: Some fear the change will worsen anti-Black discrimination.

Discrimination against anti-Blacks?  Discrimination by anti-Blacks?  Kind of a weird sentence structure there, Sparky.

/Kind of like "restricted to unauthorized personnel" vs "restricted to authorized personnel."  The reader probably knows what you intended, but...


It's probably anti-blacks that are doing the discriminating so it works either way 🤷
 
2020-10-21 9:54:31 AM  
"I'm just laying here watching my algorithms get crushed"
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-10-21 9:55:56 AM  
Cash Bail is my street name.
 
2020-10-21 9:58:47 AM  
We had an article on here in the past year or two where they either did a study or actually implemented this and the algorythm showed the same or worse bias than the judges. You account for those things in the algorythm but it starts getting a little heavy handed. Different thresholds for different races or incomes. It would be tough to get right.
 
2020-10-21 10:01:46 AM  

Walker: "I'm just laying here watching my algorithms get crushed"
[Fark user image 850x638]



Ben Affleck looks like shiat.
 
2020-10-21 10:09:41 AM  
yeah we voted to end cash bail like two years ago, so imagine my surprise when on this ballot there's an ARE YOU SURE THAT IS WHAT YOU WANT TO DO Initiative.

Fark you we were clear the first time.
 
2020-10-21 10:12:25 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-10-21 10:12:38 AM  

morg: We had an article on here in the past year or two where they either did a study or actually implemented this and the algorythm showed the same or worse bias than the judges. You account for those things in the algorythm but it starts getting a little heavy handed. Different thresholds for different races or incomes. It would be tough to get right.


I'd rather work on that than constantly economically preying on people.  Either you are a flight risk/danger or you are not, paying bail doesn't change behavior, it just takes money from vulnerable people who most often can't afford it.

we should continue collecting data and working to root out discrimination/racism in decisioning, but not also negatively economically impact those who are potentially victims of the same.
 
2020-10-21 10:14:57 AM  
By and large, if it's on the ballot in California, it's a stupid farkin' idea.
 
2020-10-21 10:16:51 AM  

The Smails Kid: By and large, if it's on the ballot in California, it's a stupid farkin' idea.


Or it's trying to overturn a stupid farkin' idea foisted on us by the politicians.
 
2020-10-21 10:22:35 AM  
So what the fark? Nothing in the proposition mentions anything about algorithms, AI, etc. Why is the media pushing this narrative? Sigh I guess I'll read the article...
 
2020-10-21 10:30:27 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-10-21 10:30:53 AM  
The *only* substanitive mention of technology in the article is this: "The original version of the bill did not mention risk assessment tools, but amendments gradually gave more power to the technology, as well as to judges, who could order someone held indefinitely before trial."

That's it? For an article to have a lead like this and so little content about the goddamn proposed law is farking absurd.

As for the tech, *yes* it is absolutely true that it will be racist as fark if the effort isn't put in to debías it. But using this as a boogeyman to uphold cash bail, which is *for sure* classist and racist, and for sure supports a shiatty scummy industry, is just plain stupid. Or malicious. Or paid off by the bail industry.
 
2020-10-21 10:32:09 AM  
"The idea that people are inherently risky needs to change," Meghan Guevara, an executive partner at the Pretrial Justice Institute, said. "The problem with risk assessment tools is that everyone is ranked as having some kind of risk."

The problem and also the value.
 
2020-10-21 10:33:44 AM  
i.pinimg.comView Full Size
 
2020-10-21 10:34:34 AM  

PawisBetlog: yeah we voted to end cash bail like two years ago, so imagine my surprise when on this ballot there's an ARE YOU SURE THAT IS WHAT YOU WANT TO DO Initiative.

Fark you we were clear the first time.


Oh so you want to put hard working bail bondsman and bounty hunters out of business? Some people I swear!

/I want them out of business too
 
2020-10-21 10:37:11 AM  

SanityIsAFullTimeJob: "The idea that people are inherently risky needs to change," Meghan Guevara, an executive partner at the Pretrial Justice Institute, said. "The problem with risk assessment tools is that everyone is ranked as having some kind of risk."

The problem and also the value.


Yeah this is a fundamental misunderstanding of how classifiers work. When I first read your quote I thought they were talking about cash bail, where risk assigned to everyone seems to be near 100% because otherwise why charge money? Meanwhile the classifier might assign a fuzzy risk between 10 and 100 percent.
 
2020-10-21 10:40:12 AM  

The Smails Kid: By and large, if it's on the ballot in California, it's a stupid farkin' idea.


I pretty much voted a straight "NO" ticket in Cali this year..... maybe 1 yes vote
 
2020-10-21 10:40:58 AM  

Snotnose: The Smails Kid: By and large, if it's on the ballot in California, it's a stupid farkin' idea.

Or it's trying to overturn a stupid farkin' idea foisted on us by the politicians.


Who were on the ballot in California.
 
2020-10-21 10:40:59 AM  

My Second Fark Account: The *only* substanitive mention of technology in the article is this: "The original version of the bill did not mention risk assessment tools, but amendments gradually gave more power to the technology, as well as to judges, who could order someone held indefinitely before trial."

That's it? For an article to have a lead like this and so little content about the goddamn proposed law is farking absurd.

As for the tech, *yes* it is absolutely true that it will be racist as fark if the effort isn't put in to debías it. But using this as a boogeyman to uphold cash bail, which is *for sure* classist and racist, and for sure supports a shiatty scummy industry, is just plain stupid. Or malicious. Or paid off by the bail industry.


Here's the text of the proposed law: https://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2020/​genera​l/pdf/topl-prop25.pdf

Have fun reading that giant pile of legalese.  As for use of algorithms, the phrase "use of a validated risk assessment tool" pops up a bunch of times (as the story mentioned).

The executive summary of the bill is here: https://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/p​roposit​ions/25/
 
2020-10-21 10:42:07 AM  

The Smails Kid: By and large, if it's on the ballot in California, it's a stupid farkin' idea.


Californian here. You are correct.
 
2020-10-21 10:44:03 AM  

groppet: PawisBetlog: yeah we voted to end cash bail like two years ago, so imagine my surprise when on this ballot there's an ARE YOU SURE THAT IS WHAT YOU WANT TO DO Initiative.

Fark you we were clear the first time.

Oh so you want to put hard working bail bondsman and bounty hunters out of business? Some people I swear!

/I want them out of business too


This proposition is a response by said bail bondsmen to the attempt to put them out of business.  This is not an uncommon practice; forcing a new law to be approved by the voters if somebody doesn't like it.
 
2020-10-21 10:46:39 AM  

SanityIsAFullTimeJob: "The idea that people are inherently risky needs to change," Meghan Guevara, an executive partner at the Pretrial Justice Institute, said. "The problem with risk assessment tools is that everyone is ranked as having some kind of risk."

The problem and also the value.


If someone commits a crime they are going to have some inherent risk.  This is one of the stupidest comments I have read in a long time.
 
2020-10-21 10:48:19 AM  

My Second Fark Account: The *only* substanitive mention of technology in the article is this: "The original version of the bill did not mention risk assessment tools, but amendments gradually gave more power to the technology, as well as to judges, who could order someone held indefinitely before trial."

That's it? For an article to have a lead like this and so little content about the goddamn proposed law is farking absurd.

As for the tech, *yes* it is absolutely true that it will be racist as fark if the effort isn't put in to debías it. But using this as a boogeyman to uphold cash bail, which is *for sure* classist and racist, and for sure supports a shiatty scummy industry, is just plain stupid. Or malicious. Or paid off by the bail industry.


You do realize that any attempts to "debias" will result in an increase in people committing crimes while out on "bail", right?

Any effort to change the number of people who pass the algorithm from X to X + n is going to have the impact of letting the wrong people out.

Now, unless you set it and forget it, guess what happens? If the algorithm looks at data in a manner that makes sense, it'll undo any attempts to "debias" it, because it'll be looking to a skewed sample. You'll actually make things worse because you'll be speeding the data with data points that reflect bad outcomes.

Ironically, the best way to remove the bias from an algorithm is to let it do its thing, and look to data that is kept up to date. In doing so, it'll eventually gravitate to a stable outcome that's supported by the numbers as opposed to relying on statements by the accused's mother that her son wouldn't engage in bad behavior.
 
2020-10-21 10:48:53 AM  

mofa: The Smails Kid: By and large, if it's on the ballot in California, it's a stupid farkin' idea.

Californian here. You are correct.


It's not a proposition. It's a referendum on a law that was already passed by the legislature. The referendum only exists due to an effort supported by the bail industry.
 
2020-10-21 10:49:44 AM  

groppet: PawisBetlog: yeah we voted to end cash bail like two years ago, so imagine my surprise when on this ballot there's an ARE YOU SURE THAT IS WHAT YOU WANT TO DO Initiative.

Fark you we were clear the first time.

Oh so you want to put hard working bail bondsman and bounty hunters out of business? Some people I swear!

/I want them out of business too


img.discogs.comView Full Size
 
2020-10-21 10:53:50 AM  
In a no-cash system, who goes after the people who don't show up? A bail bondsman has the incentive of retrieving his cash from the court, so he'll hire bounty hunters, but who's got an incentive to pursue fugitives if there's no money on the line?
 
2020-10-21 10:55:49 AM  

American-Irish eyes: SanityIsAFullTimeJob: "The idea that people are inherently risky needs to change," Meghan Guevara, an executive partner at the Pretrial Justice Institute, said. "The problem with risk assessment tools is that everyone is ranked as having some kind of risk."

The problem and also the value.

If someone commits a crime they are going to have some inherent risk.  This is one of the stupidest comments I have read in a long time.


Everyone has inherent risk.

Assume someone has a 10% chance of defaulting on any given loan, and you can lend with a 0% cost of funds.

Would you give them a $200k mortgage at 3.5%?

Would you give them a $30k auto loan at 5%?

Would you give them a $10k credit card at 18.99%?

None of these are actually obvious answers, in all fairness. There's other math that goes on.

The problem with risk assessment is you have to evaluate the numbers. Most people are not equipped to do that well.

What % chance of rain does it need to be before you bring a raincoat or an umbrella? Depends on your risk tolerance, what the potential downside is, etc.
 
2020-10-21 10:56:37 AM  

jjorsett: In a no-cash system, who goes after the people who don't show up? A bail bondsman has the incentive of retrieving his cash from the court, so he'll hire bounty hunters, but who's got an incentive to pursue fugitives if there's no money on the line?


That's viewed as a plus by the Left.
 
2020-10-21 10:56:39 AM  

Geotpf: My Second Fark Account: The *only* substanitive mention of technology in the article is this: "The original version of the bill did not mention risk assessment tools, but amendments gradually gave more power to the technology, as well as to judges, who could order someone held indefinitely before trial."

That's it? For an article to have a lead like this and so little content about the goddamn proposed law is farking absurd.

As for the tech, *yes* it is absolutely true that it will be racist as fark if the effort isn't put in to debías it. But using this as a boogeyman to uphold cash bail, which is *for sure* classist and racist, and for sure supports a shiatty scummy industry, is just plain stupid. Or malicious. Or paid off by the bail industry.

Here's the text of the proposed law: https://vig.cdn.sos.ca.gov/2020/g​eneral/pdf/topl-prop25.pdf

Have fun reading that giant pile of legalese.  As for use of algorithms, the phrase "use of a validated risk assessment tool" pops up a bunch of times (as the story mentioned).

The executive summary of the bill is here: https://voterguide.sos.ca.gov/pr​opositions/25/


Yeah so the good news is that "validated assessment tool" can mean goddamn anything, and it *also* means it has to undergo validation. I work in medical device software, and validation is a specific process required to meet regulations: we determine that the software product does what it is intended to do. Include tests/demonstrations that the SW isn't racist in the validation protocol.

Also the vagueness of the law means that the system used to replace cash bail can be iterated upon. All good news to me.

In any case an article needed to be written, the media outlet needed to generate clicks, and submitter needed a greenlight. And using the technology angle accomplishes this. I hope it doesn't tank a good law in the process.
 
2020-10-21 11:06:19 AM  
Is there anything Al Gore didn't invent??
 
2020-10-21 11:23:46 AM  

jjorsett: In a no-cash system, who goes after the people who don't show up?


The same as is done in a 10% cash bail state: a bench warrant is put out and the next time they come across a cop for anything they generally get picked up.
 
2020-10-21 11:27:54 AM  

My Second Fark Account: mofa: The Smails Kid: By and large, if it's on the ballot in California, it's a stupid farkin' idea.

Californian here. You are correct.

It's not a proposition. It's a referendum on a law that was already passed by the legislature. The referendum only exists due to an effort supported by the bail industry.


Referendums of this sort are called propositions in California.  Everything put to the voters like this is a proposition.  This is Proposition 25.
 
2020-10-21 11:29:52 AM  
But the current system works so well.
 
2020-10-21 11:39:44 AM  

gar1013: jjorsett: In a no-cash system, who goes after the people who don't show up? A bail bondsman has the incentive of retrieving his cash from the court, so he'll hire bounty hunters, but who's got an incentive to pursue fugitives if there's no money on the line?

That's viewed as a plus by the Left.


Absolutely. Remove all profit motive from the justice system.
 
2020-10-21 11:42:05 AM  

jjorsett: In a no-cash system, who goes after the people who don't show up? A bail bondsman has the incentive of retrieving his cash from the court, so he'll hire bounty hunters, but who's got an incentive to pursue fugitives if there's no money on the line?


Individuals who are hired by the government, licensed by the government, and accountable to the people. You know - police officers, sheriffs, that sort of person.

The idea of privatizing this out to bail bondsmen and bounty hunters is farking idiotic. It's uniquely American and somehow literally every other country in the world exists without them.
 
2020-10-21 11:43:15 AM  

American-Irish eyes: SanityIsAFullTimeJob: "The idea that people are inherently risky needs to change," Meghan Guevara, an executive partner at the Pretrial Justice Institute, said. "The problem with risk assessment tools is that everyone is ranked as having some kind of risk."

The problem and also the value.

If someone commits a crime they are going to have some inherent risk.  This is one of the stupidest comments I have read in a long time.


That's a pretty giant "if" you got there hanging out in front of your comment, making the rest of it absolutely one of the stupidest comments I have read in a long time.
 
2020-10-21 11:48:30 AM  

BolloxReader: gar1013: jjorsett: In a no-cash system, who goes after the people who don't show up? A bail bondsman has the incentive of retrieving his cash from the court, so he'll hire bounty hunters, but who's got an incentive to pursue fugitives if there's no money on the line?

That's viewed as a plus by the Left.

Absolutely. Remove all profit motive from the justice system.


I noticed that you seemed to lack concern for crime victims or the general public's safety.

Typical Leftist.
 
2020-10-21 11:49:56 AM  

meanmutton: jjorsett: In a no-cash system, who goes after the people who don't show up? A bail bondsman has the incentive of retrieving his cash from the court, so he'll hire bounty hunters, but who's got an incentive to pursue fugitives if there's no money on the line?

Individuals who are hired by the government, licensed by the government, and accountable to the people. You know - police officers, sheriffs, that sort of person.

The idea of privatizing this out to bail bondsmen and bounty hunters is farking idiotic. It's uniquely American and somehow literally every other country in the world exists without them.


But I thought the police were to be defunded.

How are they supposed to chase after people who are avoiding trial while also providing for public safety with less (or no) money?

How about we send social workers to bore criminals into compliance?
 
2020-10-21 12:13:48 PM  

Geotpf: My Second Fark Account: mofa: The Smails Kid: By and large, if it's on the ballot in California, it's a stupid farkin' idea.

Californian here. You are correct.

It's not a proposition. It's a referendum on a law that was already passed by the legislature. The referendum only exists due to an effort supported by the bail industry.

Referendums of this sort are called propositions in California.  Everything put to the voters like this is a proposition.  This is Proposition 25.


Sorry. What I *meant* to say is that the "vote no on all props" sentiment is misplaced on props that are referendums for laws already passed by the legislature.
 
2020-10-21 12:15:52 PM  

American-Irish eyes: SanityIsAFullTimeJob: "The idea that people are inherently risky needs to change," Meghan Guevara, an executive partner at the Pretrial Justice Institute, said. "The problem with risk assessment tools is that everyone is ranked as having some kind of risk."

The problem and also the value.

If someone commits a crime they are going to have some inherent risk.  This is one of the stupidest comments I have read in a long time.


If they are pending pre-trial release they may well have not committed a crime.
 
2020-10-21 12:19:15 PM  

meanmutton: American-Irish eyes: SanityIsAFullTimeJob:

When sufficient evidence someone commits a crime exists to arrest and indict them, they are going to have some inherent risk.  This is one of the stupidest comments I have read in a long time.

That's a pretty giant "if" you got there hanging out in front of your comment, making the rest of it absolutely one of the stupidest comments I have read in a long time.


There, no more 'if".
 
2020-10-21 12:31:23 PM  

American-Irish eyes: SanityIsAFullTimeJob: "The idea that people are inherently risky needs to change," Meghan Guevara, an executive partner at the Pretrial Justice Institute, said. "The problem with risk assessment tools is that everyone is ranked as having some kind of risk."

The problem and also the value.

If someone commits a crime they are going to have some inherent risk.  This is one of the stupidest comments I have read in a long time.


I know it's like, REALLY hard to remember this, but not everyone who get arrested has committed a crime.
 
2020-10-21 12:32:39 PM  

Snotnose: The Smails Kid: By and large, if it's on the ballot in California, it's a stupid farkin' idea.

Or it's trying to overturn a stupid farkin' idea foisted on us by the politicians.


Cash Bail is an idea so dumb that only Americans would use it.
 
2020-10-21 12:32:42 PM  

Avigdore: meanmutton: American-Irish eyes: SanityIsAFullTimeJob:

When sufficient evidence someone commits a crime exists to arrest and indict them, they are going to have some inherent risk.  This is one of the stupidest comments I have read in a long time.

That's a pretty giant "if" you got there hanging out in front of your comment, making the rest of it absolutely one of the stupidest comments I have read in a long time.

There, no more 'if".


Hey, look.... fascism!
How about you take your cowardly submission to authority and get the fark out of my free country?
 
2020-10-21 12:43:14 PM  

gar1013: I noticed that you seemed to lack concern for crime victims or the general public's safety.


Nothing about this proposal (uh, I hope?!) prevents seriously dangerous criminals from being detained.

Around here, my county has a very long, sordid history of setting unbelievably high amounts of bail for homicides. This effectively means most remain in jail until trial. One recent case had a guy able to bail out, and I believe he basically had to sell his house and also cash out every retirement account he had to make bail. Then, it was home confinement which meant a forced early retirement from his long-term career. I would be surprised if the guy isn't basically bankrupt from legal bills and now stuck as unemployable due to age and notoriety from his murder case.

I honestly don't know if my state allows people to be no-bailed. I assume that if it's a particularly heinous case and someone is very criminally dangerous, they'd just set bail so high as to be unaffordable. Then, even if they could afford bail, they'd probably be on GPS monitoring with home confinement.

Home confinement starts a separate issue, because people who can be out on bail often have jobs. If the court doesn't let them leave the house for work, they basically lose everything. My cousin was in that category: allowed to leave home for court appointments, medical appointments, legal appointments, and nothing else. "Your Honor, can I get a job? FARK NO, stay at home."
 
2020-10-21 12:43:43 PM  
An algorithm based on inherently racist data is going to produce racist results.  How about:

if (defendant is accused of criminal homicide, sexual assault, kidnapping, armed robbery, aggravated assault, or domestic violence) {hold until trial}

if (defendant has failed to show for court after being arrested for one bench violation for this crime) {hold until trial}

else {release with a print out clearly showing next court date}
 
2020-10-21 12:47:34 PM  

gar1013: chase after people


Strawman.

Police do not "chase after people" who have bench warrants now. Bench warrants are enforced when people are detained for later crimes.

If you're going to (as usual) be a facist supporter of racism, try not to support your views with arguments a 5-year-old can dismantle.
 
Displayed 50 of 67 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.