[rnk]

This is a real problem. These algorithms are a way for us in the west to experience social credit type scores like we read about from China. I'm sure there's someone here who was unfortunate to have a name that overlapped in some way with an identified "terrorist". Don't forget that when you buy an airplane ticket, there's that always slightly worrisome option to "add your special id number if you are incorrectly listed as a terrorist", whatever they call that. The inability to sue to identify the problem or correct it is a real loss of autonomy and freedom. I've always wondered what the impact would be if I ran into that. And also how come the 'terrorist' can't just find out someone's excuse-me number? I put terrorist in quotes not because there aren't any real terrorists, but because it is such a fraught identification, subjective, there must be mistakes.

[0xDEAFBEAD]

>The inability to sue to identify the problem or correct it is a real loss of autonomy and freedom.

It's unclear if "inability to sue" applies in this case. For example:

>Discriminating against people based on their gender and ethnic background is illegal in the Netherlands, but converting that information into data points to be fed into an algorithm may not be. This gray area, in part the result of broad legal leeway granted in the name of fighting welfare fraud, lets officials process and profile welfare recipients based on sensitive characteristics in ways that would otherwise be illegal. Dutch courts are currently reviewing the issue.

[Biologist123]

In the west, I sometimes wonder if we already have a scoring system which ensures only good citizens can access housing, food and the rest.

It’s called “money”, which together with credit scoring functions to make sure you abide by the rules society sets: no pay, no play.

[lozenge]

Money in the US traces back to redlining, racist deeds, racist lending criteria, white areas enforced with mob violence etc. Money is just the modern legal way of carrying over past discrimination.

[RandomLensman]

Interesting that money in the US should have a very different origin - how did that happen?

[safety1st]

This is like equating dick pic spam with sexual abuse, yes the first one is problematic, but no it is not equal to the second, in fact it's a disservice to victims of genuine abuse to equate them.

I can get money from almost anybody who's willing to give it to me for any reason, the government's influence and visibility into this are limited. I can earn money in some other currency/jurisdiction and convert it, too. Agree the US credit bureaus are problematic (they are not a "Western" thing, they're an American thing), but they're nothing like the social credit score.

With China's social credit score there's one number in a database which the government can adjust as they see fit, if they decide to penalize you, you're no longer able to participate in a vast array of social services and functions. It is total control and you become a pariah overnight.

This comment was whataboutism, I guess. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

[Biologist123]

Your analogy is a bit of an odd one, as unsolicited dick pics are undoubtedly a form of sexual abuse.

[PH95VuimJjqBqy]

Are you implying their point about equivalency is incorrect?

The other poster is not saying random dick pic's are ok, they're saying there's a gradation to the depravity.

It's like calling a 25 y/o man who sleeps with 17 y/o girl a pedophile. You're using the same word that you would if the girl was 10, but those are not nearly the same acts. One is inappropriate, the other is heinous.

this "guilt inflation" just makes it so many of us stop trusting words.

When I hear the word pedophile, I shouldn't have to ask clarifying questions to find out if the speaker is trying to manipulate my feelings or not. Likewise, if someone uses the phrase "sexual assault", I shouldn't have to ask clarifying questions to determine if it was some jackass sending unsolicited dick pics online or something more harmful (that may or may not also involve sending unsolicited dick pics).

Because, just like the pedophile example, a dick pic from a rando online and a dick pic from your boss or coworker are two wholly different acts.

[15457345234]

> With China's social credit score there's one number in a database

Isn't the consensus that this doesn't actually exist, though?

It's one of those very well talked about things that in reality just... isn't... there.