Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Mo Farah got held by US customs on suspicion of being a terrorist Watch

    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexgadgetman)
    We can live in hope
    Also - in all honesty most white americans would be unlikely to recognise Mo, partly because he is famous in Britain, not the US and partly because of the cross-race effect.



    If 90% of robberies are committed by people wearing glasses, i expect 90% of arrests for robberies to be people wearing glasses.
    If 95% of vandalism is committed by teenagers, i expect police to be vigilant against youths carrying spray cans.
    If 70% of a certain heinous act are committed by a certain hitherto unmentioned religion, i expect 70% of the random spot checks to be on members of that certain unmentioned religion. Not a case of bias, just statistics. Now if the % of that certain unmentioned religion is much lower than the other 30%, surely it is merely a matter of good sense to focus even moreso on that portion of society as the % reward/effort is greatly increased.
    If you're fixing your spot check system so that you're pulling up a specific proportion of one group... it can't be described a random spot check system anymore.

    Just basic statistics.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joinedup)
    If you're fixing your spot check system so that you're pulling up a specific proportion of one group... it can't be described a random spot check system anymore.

    Just basic statistics.
    Yes it can... it selects the person from that group randomly. We define the randomness generally by giving criteria, i.e. we only spot check people, not monkeys. Further specialisation does not remove randomness, merely dilute its effect.

    Oh, and in case you are wondering, I couldn't care less what they call it, only that they conduct it in the most efficient way.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Happens to a lot of people. Certain names trigger lists and they then stop these people. A famous Bollywood actor was stopped for having the second name Khan.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    theres that old saying " dont judge the book by its cover" this is a bit like that.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexgadgetman)
    Yes it can... it selects the person from that group randomly. We define the randomness generally by giving criteria, i.e. we only spot check people, not monkeys. Further specialisation does not remove randomness, merely dilute its effect.

    Oh, and in case you are wondering, I couldn't care less what they call it, only that they conduct it in the most efficient way.
    step one - redefine random to mean non random :rolleyes:

    There's a case for random checking and there's a case for profiling - really you want to be using some of both doing both if you want the best chance of preventing terrorists.

    Here's how it works...
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8452260.stm

    Suppose you have two people - passenger X and passenger Y - and your brilliant profiling suggests Mr X is 100 times more likely than Mr Y to be a terrorist.
    Your stats tell you to pick out Mr X for additional security checks 100 times more often than Mr Y.
    But William Press says that would be a mistake.
    He says if you take the square root of their risk it narrows the gap between them - so you check Mr X only 10 times more often than Mr Y.
    That means you do not expend all your resources checking only one tiny group of people every time they turn up at an airport - and hardly ever checking people who pose a lower risk, but still a risk.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joinedup)
    step one - redefine random to mean non random :rolleyes:
    Which has already been done whichever way you look at it.

    (Original post by Joinedup)
    There's a case for random checking and there's a case for profiling - really you want to be using some of both doing both if you want the best chance of preventing terrorists.
    urmm, Obviously..... the square root point is mute, its merely an opinion.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexgadgetman)
    Which has already been done whichever way you look at it.
    well to a person who doesn't understand what random means, it may seem to be ripe for redefinition I suppose.

    urmm, Obviously..... the square root point is mute, its merely an opinion.
    It's non obvious to most people, evidently this includes you.

    PS I think you mean moot rather than mute.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 100hundreds)
    Maybe not just that, hispassport probably hashis fullname as ' mohammed farah' you know what customs are like
    No wonder some of them were annoyed when Barack Hussein Obama made it into his second term...

    Letting him through "because he is an athlete" is no good for security, but why has he been on the watch-list for so long. Do they even bother to review who they're after anymore?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lbsf1)
    Gotta love the rednecks. You not like us so you terrorist.

    The other question I have is that does he carry his medals with him everywhere just to whip out in said circumstances??
    He was visiting his family for Christmas, so I think he wanted to show all of them his medals.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    He lives in the US now so of course he would take his medals 😝


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joinedup)
    well to a person who doesn't understand what random means, it may seem to be ripe for redefinition I suppose.
    You seem to have the rather misconceived perception that randomness must be dependant on all other factors, i.e. once any criteria has been applied then randomness cannot exist. That is wrong If it wasn't, your random search would be questioning Bill who works in finance and has never been on a plane is his life, but the random search at the airport found him.

    (Original post by Joinedup)
    It's non obvious to most people, evidently this includes you.
    Interesting leap of logic.. from somewhere.. and actually, at a rate of 70% a criteria ratio of sq_root would not be likely to be applied, a 70-30 ratio would be more logical for searches and would have a higher incidence of success. Only when the figures are shifted much further would an adjustment need to be performed.

    (Original post by Joinedup)
    PS I think you mean moot rather than mute.
    YES - FORUM NAZI! (i can witre hwoveer i wsih you wlil lkiley sitll unerdtsnad - its a froum) :battle: .
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexgadgetman)
    You seem to have the rather misconceived perception that randomness must be dependant on all other factors, i.e. once any criteria has been applied then randomness cannot exist. That is wrong If it wasn't, your random search would be questioning Bill who works in finance and has never been on a plane is his life, but the random search at the airport found him.



    Interesting leap of logic.. from somewhere.. and actually, at a rate of 70% a criteria ratio of sq_root would not be likely to be applied, a 70-30 ratio would be more logical for searches and would have a higher incidence of success. Only when the figures are shifted much further would an adjustment need to be performed.



    YES - FORUM NAZI! (i can witre hwoveer i wsih you wlil lkiley sitll unerdtsnad - its a froum) :battle: .
    well if it's just a typing error and you know the difference really - my bad & no harm done.

    however mute/moot is a common mistake and many people actually don't know the difference... if you get in the habit of using the right word it'll help you out when you're going for jobs or otherwise trying to persuade people you know what you're on about.

    but yeah random checks of airline passengers will of course only ever involve checking airline passengers, well done.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    It's just "random search". Standard procedure no hard feelings.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Not surprised. I was taken into a room and questioned when I was on a school trip to New York. The only other kid that got questioned had the same name as an escaped convict.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 1, 2013
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.