Is the deep state still protecting Hunter Biden?

[PLATO]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/korihal...h=37b5df436feb

I call B.S. here. NO lending algorithm I have ever been around takes race into account in any way shape or form...and I have been around a lot of them. I will go back to what I originally said...Lack of opportunity and lack of educational opportunity causes minorities to have poorer credit profiles. The software examines these profiles in a purely risked based method. The fact that minorities are rejected more often is simply based on a higher risk profile...race is not evaluated. The problem is a more fundamental one that simply saying "Oh they rejected more minorities with similar profiles". The systems simply do not evaluate the prospective borrower's race in any way. The circumstances that caused these credit profiles is a more systemic societal issue for sure, but it is not because a program looks at race...because they do not. Lenders want to be as profitable as possible and none that I know of would reject an opportunity to make money off of anyone.

This problem speaks to how poorly society addresses equal opportunity, not to discriminatory lending. If there was equal opportunity, then you would see no differences in A.I. evaluated decisions. The fact that minorities have worse risk profiles is all of our faults and not the fault of a lender's legitimate evaluation of risk.

[PLATO]

sometimes the leviathan comes up for air

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000...7-579f9b330000

The FBI not only already had the lap top at the time of this letter from the intel experts covering for Biden, they interviewed Tony Bobulinsky who confirmed emails from it, and they censored the story - rigged the election

I wonder if Trump had handled things like a grown up if there would have been some positive reform come out of this in the long run? Sigh...there were unquestionably some fishy things in that election. Enough to say it was rigged? Hard to tell among all the B.S. being slung by both parties.

[Dauphin]

I call B.S. here. NO lending algorithm I have ever been around takes race into account in any way shape or form...and I have been around a lot of them. I will go back to what I originally said...Lack of opportunity and lack of educational opportunity causes minorities to have poorer credit profiles. The software examines these profiles in a purely risked based method. The fact that minorities are rejected more often is simply based on a higher risk profile...race is not evaluated. The problem is a more fundamental one that simply saying "Oh they rejected more minorities with similar profiles". The systems simply do not evaluate the prospective borrower's race in any way. The circumstances that caused these credit profiles is a more systemic societal issue for sure, but it is not because a program looks at race...because they do not. Lenders want to be as profitable as possible and none that I know of would reject an opportunity to make money off of anyone.

This problem speaks to how poorly society addresses equal opportunity, not to discriminatory lending. If there was equal opportunity, then you would see no differences in A.I. evaluated decisions. The fact that minorities have worse risk profiles is all of our faults and not the fault of a lender's legitimate evaluation of risk.

I think you misunderstand my meaning.

If you have an algorithm that assesses people from geographical region A as being more commonly defaulting on loans than Geographic region B, and that algorithm used geography in an assessment of credit worthiness (similar to how car insurance premiums are linked to postal code/zip code), you can end up seeing loans to customers being geographically segmented and potenitally rejected or approved in part based on geography.

Nothing wrong with that.

Problem is when that geographic area turns out to be disproportionately an ethnic minority, or conversely being homogenously white and generally wealthy. It speaks to the point you are making, that at no point was race or ethnicity entering the equation. It came in through the back door.

[Dauphin]

Ugh, make an edit, lost the post to the spam-guardian. lol

[Geronimo]

Ugh, make an edit, lost the post to the spam-guardian. lol

Isn't that generally proof of Western cancellation and genocide of Russians?

[Egbert]

Proof that westerners are brainwashed zombies! LOL

[PLATO]

I think you misunderstand my meaning.

If you have an algorithm that assesses people from geographical region A as being more commonly defaulting on loans than Geographic region B, and that algorithm used geography in an assessment of credit worthiness (similar to how car insurance premiums are linked to postal code/zip code), you can end up seeing loans to customers being geographically segmented and potenitally rejected or approved in part based on geography.

Nothing wrong with that.

Problem is when that geographic area turns out to be disproportionately an ethnic minority, or conversely being homogenously white and generally wealthy. It speaks to the point you are making, that at no point was race or ethnicity entering the equation. It came in through the back door.

There is something wrong with that. It is called "Redlining" and is near the top of the list of things lenders ensure they do not do. No lending software takes this into account. If a lender is caught redlining, the penalties are very severe...and rightfully so.

[Dauphin]

Which is the point, geography is a proxy for such discrimination. THere are other less obvious ways such things can manifest.

When algorithms do things like customer clustering, they won't know or care that basic data points like an address or a name can have proxy connotations.

[PLATO]

Which is the point, geography is a proxy for such discrimination. THere are other less obvious ways such things can manifest.

When algorithms do things like customer clustering, they won't know or care that basic data points like an address or a name can have proxy connotations.

No. The point is that lenders do not do this when making credit decisions. The only time that geography comes into play is with the Community Reinvestment Act and that only provides BETTER pricing to help underperforming areas. It still does not affect credit decisions.