this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2025
266 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

69211 readers
3061 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
266
An Algorithm Deemed This Nearly Blind 70-Year-Old Prisoner a “Moderate Risk.” Now He’s No Longer Eligible for Parole. (www.propublica.org)
submitted 1 week ago by Tea@programming.dev to c/technology@lemmy.world
17 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
  • Limiting Parole: A new law pushed by Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry cedes much of the power of the parole board to an algorithm that prevents thousands of prisoners from early release.
  • Immutable Risk Score: The risk assessment tool, TIGER, does not take into account efforts prisoners make to rehabilitate themselves. Instead, it focuses on factors that cannot be changed.
  • Racial Bias: Civil rights attorneys say the new law could disproportionately harm Black people in part because the algorithm measures factors where racial disparities already exist.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

how to oppose the allure of cruelty?

Value life itself, and health.

Life and health are higher values than money. That's where the need for public health insurance comes from. That's where laws against murder etc. come from.

But you can't take this understanding for granted anymore. You have to think about it, and teach, and learn, and promote, and discuss it everywhere in society.

Note that this does not depend on a political party. You are allowed :) to, and you actually should discuss values with people from both sides, and more.

[–] taladar@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago

But that is the entire point of responsibility diffusion. Everyone knows murder is wrong but what about 100 people each making 1% of the decisions that leads to a loss of life? What about 10000 each making 0.01%? At which point does an individual feel sufficiently detached from the consequences of their actions to make choices that would go beyond their own morals if responsibility was concentrated on them alone?