[chrisseaton]

I do. They allow people who are lending money or extending credit to know what kind of risk they are likely taking on. They also let you know how risky you appear to be when you ask someone for a loan or credit. This allows people to reduce their risk, and it allows people to understand and manage the risk that they present.

[mindslight]

Each party to a transaction has a different perspective. Speaking about the benefits to one party while ignoring the harm to others is nonsensical. Comprehensive surveillance databases obviously benefit lenders, or they wouldn't pay to create them. But general society is harmed by creating surveillance records that would make even the most staunch Stasi agent blush.

[chrisseaton]

> Speaking about the benefits to one party while ignoring the harm to others is nonsensical.

But I did mention both parties. When I want credit it lets me understand my own risk profile and to manage it:

> They also let you know how risky you appear to be when you ask someone for a loan or credit.

> But general society is harmed by creating surveillance records that would make even the most staunch Stasi agent blush.

I think bad lending and borrowing is a major risk to society.

[mindslight]

Speaking how one party can better conform to the other party's requirements is not an honest description of both perspectives.

Bad lending is better attributed to a mistaken belief that borrowers can be perfectly modeled to reduce variance. The economic crunch we're currently facing has been directly caused by cheap credit based on such assumptions which, once again, turn out to be suddenly correlated.