On 5/5/2010 10:58 AM, Warp wrote:
>    For some reason you seem to think that "using a profile" means "discard
> all other evidence and *only* use the profile" (in some past post you even
> explicitly talked about profiles *increasing* the amount of subjects, which
> at the time I didn't understand at all because it made no sense, but now I
> think you were implying "using a profile *and* discarding all other clues").
> I don't understand where you are getting that. It's certainly not something
> I have said nor implied.
>
Somewhere I read something, I don't remember where, which stated that, 
when profiles work, its because enough was known of the suspect to 
already narrow the focus to someone that "fit" the profile, but that, in 
cases where almost nothing is known, its a 50:50 hit or miss. The whole 
FBI profile BS you see in TV, is just that, BS. It doesn't work, unless 
you already know you are looking for someone that "fits" the profile. At 
which point it acts as confirmation (sort of), but gives no other useful 
information, most of the time.

In which case, the result you end up with is **not** profiling. By 
definition, profiling means that you know where, when, but not who, did 
something, so you make a "projection", as to who did it. If you know 
nothing about the who, you can't make a useful bloody prediction, and 
you might be 100% dead wrong, about **everything** related to that 
profile, or avenues that result from it.

-- 
void main () {

     if version = "Vista" {
       call slow_by_half();
       call DRM_everything();
     }
     call functional_code();
   }
   else
     call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models, 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message