• 25 Posts
  • 20 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle
  • Do you think the department of education writes the textbooks, standardized tests (SAT, ACT, etc.), grading and student management software, learning management systems (Google Classroom, Canvas), or manufactures its own classroom tech (Chromebooks, tablets)?

    Each one of those has a bunch of particular nuances, but in general - yeah, I think they could and should in a lot of those cases

    The education system is full of for-profit businesses that can jack up the prices, and they do.

    Yeah, it’s a big problem with a lot of little parts to be tackled

    The DOE simply doesn’t have the resources to create these things themselves

    Then government should give them the resources (actually, I think a whole separate agency that develops open source software for any government agency or anyone else who wants to use them should be established, but that’s kind of besides the point).

    and would cost them far more if they tried

    I don’t think that’s true, and even if it were I think we should be willing to pay premium to make sure essential systems that support the public good are being administered in democratic ways (e.g. by public agencies that are required to give public reports to elected lawmakers and be subject to citizens’ FOIA requests).

    the business model has existed forever

    A lot of stupid ideas hang on for a really long time. Like, we still have monarchies in the 21st century world.

    Personally, I’m more concerned with the use of Google products in schools. A company that’s sole business is harvesting user data and selling it to advertisers should have no place in schools or children’s products. But they’ve embedded themselves into everything so people just accept it at the cost of privacy

    I 100% agree this is a significant problem too, I just haven’t come across any good articles about it recently



  • Exactly, they’re a captive audience, and moreover they are legally incompetent to consent to a contracted business relationship like this

    If this was a department of education AI or even some kind of transparently administered non-profit organization I’d be fine with this, but the fact that this is being developed for some for profit company that can just jack their rates and cut off public schools whenever they want to is bullshit. Like, I’m not opposed to the technology of LLMs at all, I think they’re actually pretty neat, but our social and economic systems have a lot of exploitative trash in them that cool technologies can inadvertently exacerbate.



  • I didn’t realize the anti-immigrant sentiment had gotten to this level in so much of the population

    I think the causation is backwards here, a lot of low engagement voters just assume that the best policies are somewhere to the left of whatever the GOP wants and to right of whatever the Dems are pushing for, but they keep thinking that even as the Dems move to the right.

    Dems were thinking if independents saw that they’d respect the Dems willingness to compromise or whatever, but Indies saw that and just decided “Oh, I guess immigration really is a problem like the Republicans were saying all along, even the Democratic party thinks we need a border wall now.”

    e; an attempt at better phrasing


















  • Good on him, who doesn’t?

    Oh absolutely, no argument there.

    Is it oniony because he’s a rapper and if so, what in all boomer hell kind of a take is that? Yikes

    No, my intention there was more like " healthcare is such an unbelievably bad scam in this country We had to get a random celebrity that you haven’t thought about for several years on the problem." Like, I figured the service level seeming randomness of the headline would be a good hook to draw people into reading about a real problem (hospital prices being completely unpredictable ) and a good person trying to do something about it, but after reading your comment I can see how that might not have come through.















  • Maybe this mirror of it will?

    https://archive.is/nB7Db

    But I’m guessing it talking about the claim only ~9% of the time officers were able to confirm a firearm was present on the scene.

    Don’t think that shows up, this article is previously unpublished stuff I believe

    For at least nine months, between October 2017 and July 2018, Scott DeDore tracked ShotSpotter’s accuracy in identifying confirmed gunshots. DeDore regularly shared his findings with Chicago police and ShotSpotter, and even attempted to hone the tool’s precision by working alongside the company to install additional sensors, documents obtained through public records requests show. Over the course of those nine months, according to the records, ShotSpotter correctly detected a gunshot in 63 of 135 instances in which a person was struck, an accuracy rate of about 47 percent.

    One month after DeDore sent his last available report, then mayor Rahm Emanuel signed a new three-year, $33 million contract with ShotSpotter (the company has since rebranded as SoundThinking). It covered 12 police districts—100 square miles—and made Chicago the company’s largest customer at the time.

    These records represent a look into a small corner of Chicago’s southwest side from more than half a decade ago. But they offer a unique window into ShotSpotter and its role in an increasingly surveilled city. And they came at a time when the city was reinventing its policing strategy. Six years later, Chicago is again at a crossroad, as a new mayoral administration “reimagines” public safety and mulls the fate of ShotSpotter when its contract expires in mid-February.