Quantcast

Jump to content


Photo

Shooting People for Science!


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 jcrboy

jcrboy
  • Oh shit there's a thing here

  • 6,953 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 December 2014 - 09:44 AM

Okay, so before you read any further, I'm going to need you to play a game for me (insert scary Jigsaw voice: "I'd like to play a game"):

 

The rules are easy:

1. The scene will change a few times, then a potential assailant will pop up on your screen.

2. You have less than a second to decide whether to shoot them or not.

3. If the person on your screen is holding a gun, press J to shoot them, if they are holding an nonthreatening object (cell phone, wallet, Slurpee), press F to not shoot them.

 

http://www.csun.edu/...ST/consent.html

 

After you've submitted your data to science, we can start talking about why I put this in the debate section...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Done? Ok, let's start this conversation with a quote from the article that linked to this test on Cracked.com

Spoiler
 
I want to talk about this more, but I'm at work right now, so this is the best I can do until I get off... soooooo...
 
DISCUSS

Edited by jcrboy, 12 December 2014 - 10:26 AM.


#2 talbs

talbs
  • 4,057 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 December 2014 - 10:16 AM

What are we debating? How long someone will sit there and press F and J waiting on their results? Or do you ever actually find out? I played for like 10 minutes eager to see how I performed, and then I gave up. I didn't shoot based on color. I shot based on my inability to actually see what they were holding. The objects were small and sometimes blended in too well with the background.


Edited by talbs, 12 December 2014 - 10:17 AM.


#3 jcrboy

jcrboy
  • Oh shit there's a thing here

  • 6,953 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 December 2014 - 10:25 AM

The debate is about the preliminary results, which can be found here (and I'll edit into OP for clarity).

 

I'll dive into the findings more once I get off work, just wanted to float this out there while it was fresh on my mind ;)



#4 Kate

Kate
  • 🐟🐳


  • 7,380 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 December 2014 - 10:31 AM

Yeah I gave in like @talbs ...
My ADD kicked in and I was dying left right and center.



#5 Frizzle

Frizzle
  • M'lord

  • 16,889 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 December 2014 - 10:33 AM

Racial stereotypes of statistical chance? Young black men are more likely to be involved in robberies, violent crime, drug offences and shootings than many other social groups.

#6 jcrboy

jcrboy
  • Oh shit there's a thing here

  • 6,953 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 December 2014 - 10:54 AM

Racial stereotypes of statistical chance? Young black men are more likely to be involved in robberies, violent crime, drug offences and shootings than many other social groups.

 

Now I could argue the point that at least when it comes to drug offenses, white people are using at a rate equal to or higher than the black population (and if you want, I can take the time to look up the numbers), but this test was designed to take out the real world variances and let a computer decide whether the test subject was going to be presented with a white person/black person and criminal/non-criminal.

 

The results of this test have indicated that regardless of the race of the test subject, they were more likely to pull the trigger on a black person than a white person.



#7 Jess

Jess
  • 🍴Aioli-American🍴



  • 9,220 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 December 2014 - 10:58 AM

I ended up just shooting everyone.

#8 talbs

talbs
  • 4,057 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 December 2014 - 11:06 AM

The debate is about the preliminary results, which can be found here (and I'll edit into OP for clarity).

 

I figured there was a large collection of the results somewhere. It would be cool if it asked things like age, sex, race, etc. before you started playing the game, just to have that data as well.



#9 Frizzle

Frizzle
  • M'lord

  • 16,889 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 December 2014 - 11:41 AM

Now I could argue the point that at least when it comes to drug offenses, white people are using at a rate equal to or higher than the black population (and if you want, I can take the time to look up the numbers), but this test was designed to take out the real world variances and let a computer decide whether the test subject was going to be presented with a white person/black person and criminal/non-criminal.

The results of this test have indicated that regardless of the race of the test subject, they were more likely to pull the trigger on a black person than a white person.


How can you take out real world variances? That's all down to the user.

#10 Chameleon

Chameleon
  • vampire or somesuch

  • 627 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 December 2014 - 12:45 PM

I gave up before getting to the end.  However, during the "practice" part of it, everyone was killing me.  The objects in their hands were too small to discern anyway.  So hell, I became the problem and started shooting everyone.



#11 redlion

redlion
  • I don't exist!

  • 12,070 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 December 2014 - 01:08 PM

How can you take out real world variances? That's all down to the user.

You're being characteristically obstinate.

Taking out real world variances in this case means situational changes. Whether or not you're in front of a subway tunnel, the season or weather, the type of clothes they're wearing.

It's an attempt to simplify the issue to exclude variables like income and location and just focus on the race. Of course it comes down to the user - that's why the results are posted in aggregate. If we went by Napi's results alone, everyone is racist against everyone in a uniform fashion. Statistical data is only useful if the sample size is large enough to account for outliers like Napi.

#12 Emily

Emily
  • Wonder Woman



  • 6,389 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 December 2014 - 01:13 PM

I ended up just shooting everyone.

 

Me too. Before I could be like oh that's a gun, I was dead.



#13 KyloRen

KyloRen
  • Who's the Supreme Leader now?



  • 5,130 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 December 2014 - 01:14 PM

I gave up too (by closing the window, not shooting everyone).

 

 I got tired of not being able to tell if it was a cell phone or a gun. Plus, I kept getting annoyed at the fact I lost 40 points for not shooting. For some reason you only lose 10 if you shoot someone without a gun.

I find that odd. You lose more points for dying, than you do if you shoot an innocent person. I feel like the loss of points should be the same. With the 10 point loss compared to a 40 point loss, it feels like shooting an innocent person in the game really isn't that bad. 



#14 Emily

Emily
  • Wonder Woman



  • 6,389 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 December 2014 - 01:18 PM

Well, dying is pretty bad too. 



#15 KyloRen

KyloRen
  • Who's the Supreme Leader now?



  • 5,130 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 December 2014 - 01:20 PM

Well, dying is pretty bad too. 

I'm not saying it's not bad, but a 30 point difference between dying and killing someone who didn't deserve it? In my option, that's a pretty big difference. If it were just 5-10 points in difference, I'd be fine, but 30 points seems excessive. 



#16 ortin

ortin
  • I'm so l33k

  • 5,919 posts


Users Awards

Posted 12 December 2014 - 02:40 PM

I'm not saying it's not bad, but a 30 point difference between dying and killing someone who didn't deserve it? In my option, that's a pretty big difference. If it were just 5-10 points in difference, I'd be fine, but 30 points seems excessive. 

You dying would be game over. A 30 point difference is nothing



#17 Amadeus

Amadeus
  • 135 posts


Users Awards

Posted 26 December 2014 - 11:42 AM

I ended up just shooting everyone.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users