> So if a bail bond company grants a bond to someone and they rape someone, is the bail bond company at fault? Or the judge that permitted them to bail out?
It's not a matter of fault. It's a matter of who is going to do a better job at granting bail. Promise or a Judge?
Promise says that they can, which in most tech start ups is enough. If we find out 5 years later that your algorithm sucks at, say, picking out clothes for someone, who cares? You go out of business and some people will have gotten worse clothes. If Promise's algorithm sucks then in 5 years later we will have a bunch of additional crime victims on our hands.
>And I'm willing to bet that for each person who commits a serious crime while out on this program, they will have hundreds, possibly thousands of people that don't - that are able to continue working and providing for their family when they otherwise wouldn't. Still an absolutely massive net win.
How will we know you are right? The things that Promise does are the things that should end up as peer reviewed journal articles. That's the point of my question. How is anyone going to know that Promise is working?
> It's not a matter of fault. It's a matter of who is going to do a better job at granting bail. Promise or a Judge?
Promise would not be replacing the function of a judge here. That's ludicrous. The judge would be permitting a suspect to work with Promise's system rather than rotting in jail.
> How is anyone going to know that Promise is working?
When people are able to work and take care of their families who would otherwise be sitting in a concrete box, waiting for time to pass.
> Promise would not be replacing the function of a judge here. That's ludicrous. The judge would be permitting a suspect to work with Promise's system rather than rotting in jail.
Even if their risk assessment plays no role in who gets bail, they still are involved with major decisions impacting people's lives so the point still stands. Which, after three posts you still haven't really addressed. What evidence does Promise have that their product will make things better? This isn't really something you give the old college try and hope to find success.
>When people are able to work and take care of their families who would otherwise be sitting in a concrete box, waiting for time to pass.
And how are we going to know that is happening? This is the type of stuff that is done with controlled experiments resulting in peer reviewed journal articles.
I'm not sure if you're unclear of the system, or have some specific point I've been unable to ascertain through your prior posts, but as I understand it Promise is not an alternative that allows more people to be released that otherwise would have been detained, it's an alternative that allows people that the judge already deemed eligible for bail to have a non-monetary option for release.
That is, if you have resources you can get out without Promise, Promise just helps those that were already deemed not a risk to the community by the Judge find a method of spending the weeks/months leading up to their trial still being able to lead a semi-normal life and not incarcerated and not have to have significant financial resources to do so.
You're right that it is somewhat danced around in the initial announcement. I think a lot of people, including myself, read into it based on some hints throughout (such as where it talks about pre-trial incarceration along with some other types), and made assumptions.
That said, there is a comment that clarifies that this is at least one area they are looking at:
The fundamental issue is that we are focusing on poor people who are bail eligible and incarcerated only because they cannot afford bail. [1]
That said, they could try to expand beyond that. In addition, this additional comment means a lot of what I said, and others have said, may not quite be accurate, at least in the future:
It is a judge. However, there is a recent court decision(Humphrey), that is creating a lot of change within the system. [2]
You are correct. If someone can afford bail, they will likely bail out. If someone is not given bail by a judge, they will not be allowed to bail out or participate with Promise-they will stay in jail until the resolution of their case. If someone has been given a bail, but cannot afford to bail out, this is someone who is eligible to work with Promise. If the court agrees, they will be released from jail and returned to the community (their job, home, family, etc.) without posting bail. Promise will then help support them to 1. Comply with their court mandated obligations and 2. Connect them to services based on a needs assessment conducted by Promise staff. I hope this is clear. We will work to review the website and make sure that it is. Thank you!
> Which, after three posts you still haven't really addressed. What evidence does Promise have that their product will make things better? This isn't really something you give the old college try and hope to find success.
I've addressed it. People who cannot afford to pay bail (or for a bail bond) will be able to work and be with their families rather than stay in jail. Do you disagree that this is "making things better?"
>>When people are able to work and take care of their families who would otherwise be sitting in a concrete box, waiting for time to pass.
>And how are we going to know that is happening?
Are you over-thinking this? We will know this is happening when people show up for work and then go home to their families at the end of the day.
>I've addressed it. People who cannot afford to pay bail (or for a bail bond) will be able to work and be with their families rather than stay in jail. Do you disagree that this is "making things better?"
It's not evidence. You're answer defines a success criteria, but does not give evidence. I agree that if fewer people stay in jail that would be a success. What proof does Promise have that they will achieve that?
>Are you over-thinking this? We will know this is happening when people show up for work and then go home to their families at the end of the day.
And how am I supposed to know that is happening? Is Promise going to publish numbers? What is their control group?
But to the extent that any one of those metrics may show that your methodology has a negative or even negligible impact, what mechanisms exist to ensure your fidelity to these metrics, instead of leaning on public relations and marketing that pick up the slack?
No one is here accusing you of doing any of these things. On the contrary, there is an implication that you are positive that you will be able to do these things, even though you're obviously still validating the idea, at some level.
It's not a matter of fault. It's a matter of who is going to do a better job at granting bail. Promise or a Judge?
Promise says that they can, which in most tech start ups is enough. If we find out 5 years later that your algorithm sucks at, say, picking out clothes for someone, who cares? You go out of business and some people will have gotten worse clothes. If Promise's algorithm sucks then in 5 years later we will have a bunch of additional crime victims on our hands.
>And I'm willing to bet that for each person who commits a serious crime while out on this program, they will have hundreds, possibly thousands of people that don't - that are able to continue working and providing for their family when they otherwise wouldn't. Still an absolutely massive net win.
How will we know you are right? The things that Promise does are the things that should end up as peer reviewed journal articles. That's the point of my question. How is anyone going to know that Promise is working?