• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

15 Whiner

About LenP

  • Rank
  • Birthday 09/22/1968
  1. Yes, that is the question. If the system is correct and protects lives 999 times, but then once is wrong and ruins someones life, is it worth doing? I think it is, but can understand someone taking the opposite stance. I think we could get it right often enough that it is worth doing, that in the end it would make our society better and more safe. It is not entirely dissimilar from the gun control debate. If we can save lives, but it costs the loss of some rights folks have today or destroys an industry and the accompanying jobs, is it worth doing?
  2. The safeguards would be an appeals process. For the system to be effective, it would require constant training and updating of the AI/ML bots which identify people as risks. I am 100% confident it will get it wrong some percentage of the time, but I do not believe any more so than humans get it wrong. I would ask you, what kind of success or accuracy rate would you need to support it? If we could see 99% or 99.9%, would that be enough? All of this is testable ahead of a rollout.
  3. I can understand your cynicism, but the technology and knowledge is there now which would lead to a dramatic from where we are now. We limit people's rights all the time based on genetics, someone who is blind is not getting a job driving a school bus, someone who has achondroplasia is not getting a job as a fireman. This is simply recognizing it as the medical condition it is, and understanding how it affects the individual and how they relate to the world around them. A person without a conscience can be very dangerous, particularly if we insist on treating them as if they do have one.
  4. I did not say to lock people up for social deviancy, I am suggesting we take proactive steps to mitigate the risks someone like this poses ahead of them being convicted of some crime. It does not have to mean they get locked up the second they are determined to be a threat or substantial risk, it would mean not letting them be teachers or work around kids, not letting them buy guns, etc. This would come with an appeals process, since no system is perfect. The point is not punishment, it is using the tools we have to protect innocents.
  5. That is not how AI works. We have a training set which is growing by the day, cases where we know that someone was a dangerous sociopath and where we have a substantial digital footprint. It is the training set and AI which determine the types of activities which cause someone to be flagged, not a list of phrases and keywords. This is a perfect application of AI, as the scale is far too massive to make sense of with humans sifting through it. Take the output from the AI, and then you have a subset of data that humans could actually make use of. If the AI misses something, that goes into the next training set and it gets better next time. People calling each other names or playing Internet tough guy is normal, so that is not going to cause anyone to end up in a reeducation camp.
  6. I am talking about taking these steps when someone has demonstrated they are a dangerous sociopath, but not waiting for them to be convicted of abusing someone or shooting up a school. If someone has the genetic precursor and then posts that they want to be a "professional school shooter", I am completely comfortable removing their rights and letting them prove why those rights should be restored. To be certain there are risks in acting and risks in not acting, however I believe the ability to get it right most times and the risks of not acting outweigh the negatives of the error rate and the risks of acting prematurely.
  7. Just Another High School Shooting

    You really know not of what you speak. The inability to separate the character of a person from an opinion they hold at any given moment is the type of thing which keeps one trapped in ignorance and closes one off from what are often the most fruitful relationships. There are plenty of folks I don't agree with politically, or on other topics from business strategy to religion, yet whom I deeply respect. I learn a lot more from people I disagree with than I could ever learn from people I agree with.
  8. "then what" would be substantially limit their rights and freedoms. No working with kids, or in schools, or where they could be in a position of power over vulnerable individuals. No buying guns, no commercial drivers license, etc. etc. If someone who is recognized as being a sociopath does commit a violent crime, any sentencing and/or treatment should be informed by the diagnosis. Someone who grows up in a shitty home, gets into a gang, and ends up killing someone in a hold up may actually be able to be rehabilitated. Someone who is a sociopath can not be rehabilitated. Treating them the same just because they committed the same crime is stupid. In reality, most times we are doing the opposite of what we should be. The sociopaths get off easier with a lesser sentence or punishment because they don't look hopeless like the poor gangbanger. So we treat the one who could be rehabilitated as if they could not be, and treat the one who can not as if rehabilitation is simple and the person simply fell into a bad choice.
  9. The lack of empathy appears to be more of a genetic trait, not something derived from environment. Research has also shown that it is the culture and society someone lives in which determines if that genetic lack of empathy turns into full blown dangerous sociopathy. We tend to think about it in terms of specific events a person was subjected to, or the way they were raised within a family, however the research shows those have the least effect on outcomes when it comes to sociopathy. This is really important to understand, as once someone has demonstrated dangerous sociopathic traits, there is no rehabilitation and no way to make them safe. The way we have been addressing this to date is the equivalent of treating disease by bloodletting.
  10. Just Another High School Shooting

    For the record, I am vegan now and don't hunt or pick up meat from the store. I would not expect the discussion on the second amendment to end with the implementation of a plan like mine. I expect there will continue to be people who support it, and people like you who oppose it. If it is repealed, I would comply with whatever the law is. What drives me nuts is that when something like this happens, we nearly always focus on gun laws exclusively and with proposals that would have little or no impact, as the bigger discussion on repealing the second is not politically viable at the moment. I suggest we do things that can actually have a meaningful impact today within the constraints of our current constitution, while continuing to have the larger discussion on what should be in our constitution.
  11. Just Another High School Shooting

    I have not seen where you advocated for studies on anti-social behavior and sociopathy, just gun violence.
  12. Just Another High School Shooting

    I am not saying we should not revisit gun laws. I don't see it as an either/or. I am fine with expanded background checks, I would really like consistent and uniform feeding of information into the background check system to make it more effective. Make sure that records of a 302 actually make it in, put rules in place that involuntary commitments don't become voluntary ones instead because there is less paperwork involved, and make sure those records make it into the system. Get some bright big data people from the NSA to work together with FB/Twitter, etc and come up with a plan that allows the red flags which are already there to prohibit a person with the ability to challenge it, since sometimes the AI and Big Data will get it wrong. The technology and know how is there today to fix much of this, what is missing is the will to do it. Sony can find a 10 second snippet of copyrighted music on youtube nearly in real time, yet there is no process which takes overt threats from same and provides for preventive action based on it. All of these things are technically possible and politically feasible. Repealing the second amendment is a heavy lift and not a quick fix, the above could be a relatively quick fix. If we wanted, we could have this in place in < 12 months.
  13. Just Another High School Shooting

    You missed the point. I am not surprised.
  14. Just Another High School Shooting

    We have a societal problem which causes a much greater manifestation of scoiopaths despite there being no greater genetic likelihood. Let all the potheads out of jail, and fill them up with the sociopaths we let roam the streets today. We would not only stop school shootings but might have a decent president. It is nearly impossible to keep someone dangerous locked up now. I know, because we have dealt with them and dealt with them threatening us, and there is absolutely nothing that the govt will do to help stop them. When we were going through our custody and adoption fight, the govt was not only supporting the two sociopaths fighting against us in the form of medical care, SSDI, and food stamps with no strings attached, but also paid for their legal fees. We use our own tax dollars to make us substantially less safe and to perpetuate the problem to future generations. Talking about the types of guns we should allow dangerous crazy people to own is beyond absurd, the answer is no type, and they should be locked up so they can't do other damage aside from mass shootings. This guy announced his intentions to the world, and yet as a society, we were still incapable of locking him up where he could not hurt people, and instead today are going to argue about what is the right type of gun someone like this should be allowed to own? Good grief. Outside of locking up dangerously crazy people, I would really like to see some money spent on understanding what it is in our society that seems to grow sociopaths like weeds. The genetics are the same in other societies, and yet they don't see this. I want to understand why.
  15. spacex

    Just remember, it is a spectrum, not a single thing that defines ASD. Everyone is a unique individual, including folks with ASD. IMHO, too many folks fall into the "this is how you relate to or manage folks with ASD", that includes the "experts" in the space. I would skip using pizza and a cool down period if he is frustrated, and instead try and understand what it is that is bugging him. Language can be a challenge, so if one of you gets frustrated communicating with words, go to a whiteboard and start drawing. Working through the problem will be more rewarding than pizza. Plenty of times i discover I am a bonehead that way, and that there was something important I was missing. My head of development has ASD, and does an outstanding job of managing a high performing team working in a space with enormous ambiguity and little structure. There are little things that I do to help make it work, but mostly it is just a matter of treating him like a human I value and not a diagnosis.