▲ 265 ▼ Americans are afraid of transit crime. Part of the negative image around public transit comes from the idea that it is dangerous (lemmy.world) submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by Vaya@lemmy.world to c/fuckcars@lemmy.world 51 comments fedilink hide all child comments They don’t understand probability
[+] jerkface@lemmy.ca 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 10 months ago (1 child) So they only counted those who did 500 rides a year? Or they counted 50'000'000 rides as a proxy for 100'000 subway users? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] elderorb@feddit.nl 12 points 10 months ago (1 child) I am guessing they took the average homicide rate per ride in the metro, and used those rates to create the per capita rate assuming they take 500 rides a year. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 10 months ago* Oh yeah I can see it, that would make sense! Thanks! Since a lot of tickets will be bought anonymously you can't easily count unique users of the subway system, so the raw data probably consisted of numbers of homicides, and number of rides taken by all customers combined. But the rate between those wouldn't fit the per person risk they want to be comparing. So to calculate a risk to a person they must have assumed a realistic case towards the higher end of ridership, that is, a commuter commuting 5 days a week for 50 weeks a year, to work and back, that would give the 500 rides number. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Rooster326@programming.dev 1 point 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) So you need to double it at the absolute minimum? There are 52 weeks in a year. 2 trips per day, 5 days/week and you're at 520 rides already. That is with absolutely zero rides to the grocery store, literally anywhere but work and home. And that's assuming it only takes 1 ride to get to work - which we'll... Good luck with that anywhere in America even in NYC. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 10 months ago (1 child) So they only counted those who did 500 rides a year? Or they counted 50'000'000 rides as a proxy for 100'000 subway users? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] elderorb@feddit.nl 12 points 10 months ago (1 child) I am guessing they took the average homicide rate per ride in the metro, and used those rates to create the per capita rate assuming they take 500 rides a year. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 10 months ago* Oh yeah I can see it, that would make sense! Thanks! Since a lot of tickets will be bought anonymously you can't easily count unique users of the subway system, so the raw data probably consisted of numbers of homicides, and number of rides taken by all customers combined. But the rate between those wouldn't fit the per person risk they want to be comparing. So to calculate a risk to a person they must have assumed a realistic case towards the higher end of ridership, that is, a commuter commuting 5 days a week for 50 weeks a year, to work and back, that would give the 500 rides number. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] elderorb@feddit.nl 12 points 10 months ago (1 child) I am guessing they took the average homicide rate per ride in the metro, and used those rates to create the per capita rate assuming they take 500 rides a year. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 10 months ago* Oh yeah I can see it, that would make sense! Thanks! Since a lot of tickets will be bought anonymously you can't easily count unique users of the subway system, so the raw data probably consisted of numbers of homicides, and number of rides taken by all customers combined. But the rate between those wouldn't fit the per person risk they want to be comparing. So to calculate a risk to a person they must have assumed a realistic case towards the higher end of ridership, that is, a commuter commuting 5 days a week for 50 weeks a year, to work and back, that would give the 500 rides number. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 10 months ago* Oh yeah I can see it, that would make sense! Thanks! Since a lot of tickets will be bought anonymously you can't easily count unique users of the subway system, so the raw data probably consisted of numbers of homicides, and number of rides taken by all customers combined. But the rate between those wouldn't fit the per person risk they want to be comparing. So to calculate a risk to a person they must have assumed a realistic case towards the higher end of ridership, that is, a commuter commuting 5 days a week for 50 weeks a year, to work and back, that would give the 500 rides number. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Rooster326@programming.dev 1 point 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) So you need to double it at the absolute minimum? There are 52 weeks in a year. 2 trips per day, 5 days/week and you're at 520 rides already. That is with absolutely zero rides to the grocery store, literally anywhere but work and home. And that's assuming it only takes 1 ride to get to work - which we'll... Good luck with that anywhere in America even in NYC. permalink fedilink source parent
