There is a pretty big difference in your two examples. Models of bosons behave in a predictable way. I can think of several likely reasons that reports of use-of-force incidents would not correlate directly with actual use-of-force.
As a result, in a study or a journalistic write-up of said study, I wouldn't jump to the shorthand of "tracked use-of-force incidents" as opposed to "reports of use-of-force incidents".
Just because something is the best way of measuring a quantity we currently have doesn't mean it is good enough to equate the measurement with the quantity in shorthand.
I think the examples track pretty well. You could say that body cameras somehow cause a rise and reporting that exactly offsets the reduction in violence, but that’s not even wild conjecture. It’s worse. It’s inventing factors to make the data fit, factors that are by definition not measurable. Whatever we measure, it’s possible to invent a factor that makes the measurement completely wrong.
Scientists could similarly argue that there is another particle that only shows up when we measure that happens to look exactly like the Higgs boson in every way we can measure. But then everyone would call bullshit.
Again, if there are better/other things to measure, that’s legitimate criticism. Simply inventing factors that make the valid measurements null and declaring it impossible to actually measure isn’t.
Measure what you can measure. Claim what you can claim. Don't claim what you can't claim based on what you measured. We're not talking about counting photons here. We're talking about human selective self-reporting under different circumstances. Understand the chasm between those things.
Common Sensing | iOS Developer | Cambridge, MA | FULLTIME, ONSITE | common-sensing.com
At Common Sensing we're modernizing chronic disease management. While big data has become the central theme of the last decade in tech, it has left little mark on many aspects of healthcare. We're changing that, and we need your help.
Our first product is Gocap: a connected device that integrates seamlessly into a user's workflow to collect data on insulin doses. Dose information is combined with blood glucose readings collected by our app and sent to our backend. There it empowers healthcare providers to make treatment decisions based on thousands of data points rather than the single reading they use today. This requires well-built software at all levels of the stack: device firmware, mobile apps, backend data storage and processing, frontend web portals, and a variety of tools to support building and testing the physical devices our team designs. We all wear a lot of hats here, and we're looking for software developers who'd like to do the same.
We expect you to:
• Own the iOS app, refactoring and rebuilding the current codebase where necessary and adding features as we go.
• Implement an iOS test suite that supports our verification needs.
• Learn one or more of our other software platforms and contribute to those products (C, Android, Python, Node.js, Ruby on Rails).
• Help determine the future of software at Common Sensing, from architectural and platform decisions to team process and structure.
In addition to software development, there will be opportunities to learn and participate in all aspects of the business, from fundraising to embedded electronics to clinical trials.
If this sounds fun, we'd like to hear from you at hiring@common-sensing.com. We will start with a phone screen of selected candidates then move to an onsite or remote interview.
I'm curious to know if you see much heavier participation from people with certain viewpoints based on the typical demographics of that viewpoint. @StrikeAnAccord, can you comment on this?
For example, given the demographic information in the 2016 US Elections, I would expect Hilary supporters to have much higher representation in an online/telephonic medium. Is that the case?
As a result, in a study or a journalistic write-up of said study, I wouldn't jump to the shorthand of "tracked use-of-force incidents" as opposed to "reports of use-of-force incidents".
Just because something is the best way of measuring a quantity we currently have doesn't mean it is good enough to equate the measurement with the quantity in shorthand.