Profile

Cover photo
hari jayaram
355 followers|773,358 views
AboutPostsPhotosYouTube

Stream

hari jayaram

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
Sandra and Woo: a webcomic about friendship, life and the art of (not) eating squirrels, featuring the girl Sandra and her pet raccoon Woo
5 comments on original post
1
Add a comment...

hari jayaram

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
Cognitive dissonance is a hard thing to work through sometimes.
2 comments on original post
1
Add a comment...

hari jayaram

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
Osama Shukir Mohammed Amin reveals the importance of a newly discovered tablet V of the Epic of Gilgamesh featuring additional parts about the Cedar Forest.
View original post
1
Add a comment...

hari jayaram

Shared publicly  - 
1
Folmer Fredslund's profile photo
 
Ha! They should just use a decent font :-)
Add a comment...

hari jayaram

Shared publicly  - 
 
Red hibiscus 
1
Jyothi Jayaram's profile photo
 
Beautiful
Add a comment...
Have him in circles
355 people
Björn Brembs's profile photo
Zheng Ruan's profile photo
Ha Anh's profile photo
Paulo Nuin's profile photo
Matt McGinley's profile photo
Janice Robertson's profile photo
Leon Lee's profile photo
Chris Lasher's profile photo
Dhananjay Athalye's profile photo

hari jayaram

Shared publicly  - 
 
My picture of Bombay City stylized by Google Photos #awesome
2
Add a comment...

hari jayaram

Shared publicly  - 
1
Folmer Fredslund's profile photo
 
SH0ULD B3:
PL3543 F0RW4RD 1F Y0U C4N R34D 7H15
Add a comment...

hari jayaram

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
Flying a drone to a volcano.
For more -->> http://goo.gl/LY4TId
2 comments on original post
2
Add a comment...

hari jayaram

Shared publicly  - 
 
Cambridge, MA
2
Add a comment...

hari jayaram

Shared publicly  - 
 
Donate to help refugees and migrants in urgent need. Google will match your donation.
1
Add a comment...

hari jayaram

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
The "broken windows" theory of crime prevention – that by cracking down on the visible symptoms of poverty and neglect, like broken windows or loitering, community norms would shift and other crime would decrease – has been popular for over 30 years. It comes chock-full of advantages, like requiring police departments to do things that are straightforward to achieve and measure, [1] but it has the basic problem that it doesn't seem to work.

New research is shedding deeper light on the underlying social processes which do work, however, and that's why this is a "Today I Learned" article instead of a "Politics, Society, and the Law" article. This team did a large-scale data analysis of Boston between 2011 and 2012, and found that the events (from arrest, 911, and 311 records) fell into a few natural categories: private neglect, like rats in buildings or parking on lawns; public denigration, like graffiti and broken windows; private conflict, like domestic and landlord-tenant disputes; public disorder, like reports of panhandlers and drunks; and public violence. They broke public violence down further into "basic" violence, violence involving guns, and homicides.

They compared how these different kinds of issue cropped up over space and time. While it wasn't possible to test if one thing caused another, it was possible to do what's called "cross-time correlation:" does having a lot of public denigration in a place, for example, correlate with having more public disorder or violence there later?

The answers were quite interesting. Unsurprisingly, the strongest correlations are between private conflict and public disorder and violence. Those, in turn, tend to feed back on themselves, sometimes escalating to guns, which are (by far) the main predictor of homicides. Perhaps more surprisingly, public denigration – the classic "broken windows" – showed no predictive power at all.

If we think about how conflicts tend to escalate, this makes a certain sense; if nobody had ever told you about "broken windows" theories, you would say that most fights (and murders) are between people who know each other, most fights start small and grow larger, fights between people can last a long time and spread to include other people, happen in private and in public, and so on, and probably more fights have their first origins in private than in public, but not by much.

The statements above probably seem pretty obvious, which is what made the broken windows idea seem so radical: it was upending all of this, suggesting that maybe the reason people thought it was OK to get into ever-escalating fights was the sense of decay around them, and if we just made everything look nicer, people would stop doing that.

It was a radical, but not crazy, idea; people do react to their surroundings and take cues from it. But the data increasingly seems to suggest that it's interesting, but wrong.

If this particular study has captured the real mechanisms – and as it's a study of just one city over one time window, it's far too small to give us real certainty of that – then it suggests that a more effective role for police would be to act as moderators of disputes, helping resolve and stop fights before they escalate. That's obviously a much harder job than ticketing panhandlers.

Of course, that answer may itself suffer from the blinders of asking "what can the police do?," when it's not obvious that the police are even the right mechanism. If there's one reliable pattern in sociological studies, it's that people don't become drug dealers, armed robbers, or junkies because they're stupid, inherently evil, or have some kind of cross-generational proclivity to do it; they do these things as fairly rational choices given an extremely limited set of options. [2]

That means that even murder is a symptom, rather than a cause, and actually fixing these problems will require answering deeper questions, like "why are people resolving their disputes by murder, rather than (say) talking it out, suing each other, or just moving away from each other?" In general, what we discover is that those alternatives aren't useful options to the people involved for various reasons which aren't always obvious to outsiders – and it's understanding that sort of thing which is the key to actually fixing things.


[1] And perhaps more importantly, it provides neat political narratives, as well as a good rationalization for policies that the public may want but not wish to admit to, such as forcibly removing the homeless or policing racial groups. The sad fact is that the politics of criminal law almost invariably boil down to something sordid.

[2] Even, perhaps especially, taking drugs. The key result is the famous "Rat Park" experiment (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rat_Park), which found the flaw in all those experiments that showed that rats will instantly become addicted to cocaine or heroin and take it until they die: the cages were confusing the experiment. When rats had an option of doing normal rat things or taking drugs, they had very little interest in drugs; they became addicted when it was a choice of that or being locked in a featureless white cage without drugs for months on end. This result has since been generalized beyond rats, but the key idea is there.
Why community policing should focus on helping to resolve personal and domestic disputes, not signs of physical decay.
56 comments on original post
1
Add a comment...
People
Have him in circles
355 people
Björn Brembs's profile photo
Zheng Ruan's profile photo
Ha Anh's profile photo
Paulo Nuin's profile photo
Matt McGinley's profile photo
Janice Robertson's profile photo
Leon Lee's profile photo
Chris Lasher's profile photo
Dhananjay Athalye's profile photo
Basic Information
Gender
Male
Story
Tagline
I like difficult problems
Introduction
Biochemist, Protein X-ray crystallographer, open source software geek, linux and python enthusiast.
Work
Occupation
Structural and Computational Biologist and protein biochemist
Skills
Python, Linux and open source software, protein biochemistry , X-ray crystallography, computational biology
Links
Contributor to