They wouldn’t need to label them as bad to inform users. It’s possible to display crime statistics without bias.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I don’t see how it is a map’s duty to rank areas on how good or bad they are.
Can you imagine the knock-on effects of some places being decided as being “bad” by Google?
Businesses would collapse, the area worsen, crime and poverty increase, the people who live there would have a collapse in house prices, so they’d be trapped there.
Meanwhile, in the “good” areas, businesses would do better, property prices would be driven up more than they are already, and long term only the wealthy would be able to live there.
Not to mention the whole issue of “X place has been ranked as bad and it has predominantly Y ethnicity or Z religion living there! This is a hate crime by Google!”
People should be aware that South Africa is a dangerous place with a high crime rate, particularly violent crime.
17 people per 100k get stabbed to death, compared to 0.6 for the US, 0.2 for France, and 0.08 for the UK. That’s insane.
Homicide in general is 41.9 people per 100k (3rd highest worldwide). Compared to 6.4 in the US, 1.1 in France, 1.0 in the UK.
Kbobabob@lemmy.world 11 months ago
agent_flounder@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Except that still has the same effect and simply amplifies the result of shitty policies.
Tangent5280@lemmy.world 11 months ago
That would still entrench the area - How would a change of bad to good reflect on google maps? How quickly would that change show up?
BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Crime statistics come preloaded with systemic bias for your convenience.
getseclectic@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Apparently Google stopped routing people through Nyanga a few months ago dailymaverick.co.za/…/2023-11-13-google-maps-will…
roofuskit@lemmy.world 11 months ago
It’s amazing how systemic racism can destroy a country. Speaking as someone from the US.