Moderator: Community Team
riskllama wrote:Koolbak wins this thread.
KoolBak wrote:Honestly...how do the two inter relate? Obviously I'm being thick....
Symmetry wrote:KoolBak wrote:Honestly...how do the two inter relate? Obviously I'm being thick....
Inter-relate? Why would they? They're similar, but only as dubious predictive models. Think of it more as a "do you prefer tea or coffee" kind of question.
Which do you consider more trustworthy- economic forecasts or criminal profiles?
As a head start on the Criminal Profiling is more BS front:
Dangerous Minds by Malcolm Gladwell, The NewYorker
Long read, but worth the time.
DoomYoshi wrote:I think criminal profiling is better, specifically the eugenicists.
waauw wrote:Interesting, just read a book on this topic not even one month ago; "Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy" by Cathy O'neil. I'd say they're both equally bad because they basically make the same mistakes. They both rely on generalized assumptions and discriminate through self-fulfilling prophecies.
warmonger1981 wrote:Social Sciences can be just as dangerous.
Symmetry wrote:Glad you liked the article- he's a very incisive writer.
I think one of the ways they relate is that they're both good at explaining the past, and very poor at prediciting the future.
In retrospect, some things seem easily predictable- how could that guy not have been flagged as a killer? How could extending credit to people who couldn't afford it not be seen as a risky policy? etc.
warmonger1981 wrote:Behavioral sciences. The information obtained can manipulate future societies. Whether used in government propaganda or corporations manipulating the human subconscious. Edward Bernays was pretty good at understanding the basics.
TA1LGUNN3R wrote:Too bad Beebs isn't here. You're baiting empty waters, sym.
-TG
Symmetry wrote:TA1LGUNN3R wrote:Too bad Beebs isn't here. You're baiting empty waters, sym.
-TG
BBS? He's long gone, I know. But it was usually enough to deflate his pretend economist gig by asking him a few simple questions. I never needed any kind of elaborate trap, let alone bait.
The reason I put economists into the mix was because of a lot of recent debate about the validity of economists and their predictions here in the UK- specifically the failure to predict the financial crisis and the failed predictions about the consequences of Brexit.
jusplay4fun wrote:Economic forecasting is critical to budgets (state, nationaly, corporate, etc.) These determine where to spend money to respond to needs and future considerations (e.g, jobs to create/fill; new equipment to purchase; new initiatives, etc.) In my state of Virginia, that impacts my slary as a teacher since that is partly funded by the State. Our State economists were off (predicting revenue from taxes up 5%, when they rose only about 1.5% or so). This caused our Governor to make cuts in the budget, never a FUN thing to do. My meager pay raise may not occur as a result.
Economic forecasting, IMO, is like forecasting the weather: Often right, but enough misses to keep it an art and not a true science. AND some misses are VERY BAD (8 inches of snow and not JUS 2 inches; only 1.5% growth instead of 5%).
Forecasts are like.....armpits, everyone has one, and some STINK..! LoL
Mike JP4Fun
Dukasaur wrote:warmonger1981 wrote:Social Sciences can be just as dangerous.
Can you be more specific? Economics and Criminology are both social sciences, so do you mean that they're both equally dangerous, or do you mean that some other social science is?
BoganGod wrote:Dukasaur wrote:warmonger1981 wrote:Social Sciences can be just as dangerous.
Can you be more specific? Economics and Criminology are both social sciences, so do you mean that they're both equally dangerous, or do you mean that some other social science is?
Feminist drum circle composing for lesbian interpretive dance degrees are what is causing the world to regress.
RGJ
Users browsing this forum: No registered users