Interesting People mailing list archives
mo Why's a Retired Army Lieutenant Colonel on the"No-Fly" List?]
From: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 06:33:40 -0500
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [IP] Why's a Retired Army Lieutenant Colonel on the"No-Fly" List? Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 23:13:35 -0800 (PST) From: Krulwich <krulwich () yahoo com> Reply-To: krulwich () yahoo com To: dave () farber net Dave, this is the wrong criticism. Scientifically, from the perspective of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning (my PhD area), any good methodology that attempts to inductively generalize from a sample set to predictions of future set membership, or to deductively generalize from a set of criteria describing a sample set to predictions of future set membership, is going to have false positives and false negatives. Any methodology that had zero false positives and false negatives would be so limited as to be useless. To put this in non-scientific terms, the only way to 100% avoid false identifications is to have the system so limited as to be useless, like saying "suspect someone only if they're carrying fuse wire and muttering 'allah akbhar' under their breath." On the other hand, the only way to 100% avoid missing anyone is to have the system so broad that it's useless because it suspects everyone, like saying "suspect everyone unless they're wearing a purple heart and have had their picture on TV shaking the President's hand." Any system that attempts to do something intelligent will inherently have some mistakes in both directions. That said, there are clear ways to evaluate such methodologies. What percentage of predicted group memberships are clearly wrong? What percentage of obvious examples that should be suspected are in fact suspected? But finding one example, even a prominent example, is scientifically not a reason to reject a methodology. --Bruce --- Dave Farber <dave () farber net> wrote:
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?pid=63406 The federal officials who are busy assuring Americans that they've got their act together when it comes to managing port security are not inspiring much confidence with their approach to airline security. When Dr. Robert Johnson, a heart surgeon who did his active duty with the U.S. Army Reserve before being honorably discharged with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel, arrived at the Syracuse airport near his home in upstate New York last month for a flight to Florida, he was told he could not travel. Why? Johnson was told that his name had been added to the federal "no-fly" list as a possible terror suspect. Johnson, who served in the military during the time of the first Gulf War and then came home to serve as northern New York's first board-certified thoracic surgeon and an active member of the community in his hometown of Sackets Harbor, is not a terror suspect. But he is an outspoken critic of the war in Iraq, who mounted a scrappy campaign for Congress as the Democratic challenger to Republican Representative John McHugh in 2004 and who plans to challenge McHugh again in upstate New York's sprawling 23rd District. Johnson, who eventually made it onto the flight to Florida, is angry. And, like a growing number of war critics whose names have ended up on "no-fly" lists - some of them prominent, many of them merely concerned citizens - he wants some answers. ... ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as krulwich () yahoo com To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
------------------------------------- You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- mo Why's a Retired Army Lieutenant Colonel on the"No-Fly" List?] Dave Farber (Feb 27)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- mo Why's a Retired Army Lieutenant Colonel on the"No-Fly" List?] Dave Farber (Feb 27)