3 ms·
"Actual discrimination" is made solely of data and algorithms. The use of data and algorithms does in no way protect you from being discriminatory. The discrim
by Retra 11y ago
"Actual discrimination" is made solely of data and algorithms. The use of data and algorithms does in no way protect you from being discriminatory.
The discrimination occurs when you say "in economic terms" as an excuse to ignore all the other data that people look at when determining what is discriminatory or not. Or maybe when you say "maximum profit" is the goal of your algorithm; it's clearly not the goal of the people determining what is discriminatory, nor is it the goal of society in general.
Not all discrimination is bad, nor is always a problem. But you can't argue that it doesn't exist just by ignoring the variables you don't like or can't see. You can't say "all I see is numbers and price stickers" and think that gives you any credible expertise on quantifying the value of human interaction and culture. Oversimplifying the problem always introduces errors, even if it is necessary.
- dawnbreez 11y ago"Actual discrimination" ignores facts. This statement uses facts. These data shows that people who sell women's products can get away with a steeper price point, which suggests that people who care enough about having a girl's version are willing to pay steeper prices for it. This doesn't paint a picture of discrimination, it paints a picture of people who will happily spend more for pink paint. As noted in the parent post, it also paints a picture of people willing to spend more on cartoon underoos, which suggests that this isn't a gendered phenomenon--rather, that the markets for pink things and cartoon undies are filled with customers who are willing to spend more for their favorite color/cartoon, where other, less pink/cartoon'd products aren't as highly valued.