View Single Post
Old 06-01-2017, 03:01 AM   #300
tubemonkey
monkey on the fringe
tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.tubemonkey ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
tubemonkey's Avatar
 
Posts: 45,770
Karma: 158733736
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Seattle Metro
Device: Moto E6, Echo Show
Quote:
Originally Posted by hildea View Post
I was at a conference about big data where this anecdote was discussed. Even if it's true, we don't know:
  • How many customers who got pregnancy-related ads without being pregnant
  • How many customers who were pregnant who didn't get those ads
So, at best we know that one pregnant customer got those ads, but that might be just random luck.

Another problem with using big data is that they can strenghten existing predudices. For instance say two different demographic groups use drugs equally much, but one of them is stopped and searched in random checks more often (because of predudice in the police). Then your data will tell you, quite correctly, that members of group A are more likely to be arrested for drug crimes than group B. If you use this to decide how to prioritize which groups to check more often in the future, you are making policing even more predudiced, and believing you are basing it on objective data.
So true. Well said.
tubemonkey is offline   Reply With Quote