A good guide to follow is that if something seems just so obviously absurd, it's worth considering that it may be your interpretation that's invalid. As Isamu

A good guide to follow is that if something seems just so obviously absurd, it's worth considering that it may be your interpretation that's invalid. As Isamu quotes from the paper: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12079343 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12079343 > We summarize the potential impact that the European Union’s new General Data Protection Regulation will have on the routine use of machine learning algorithms. Slated to take effect as law across the EU in 2018, it will restrict automated individual decision-making (that is, algorithms that make decisions based on user-level predictors) which “significantly affect” users. The law will also create a “right to explanation,” whereby a user can ask for an explanation of an algorithmic decision that was made about them. We argue that while this law will pose large challenges for industry, it highlights opportunities for machine learning researchers to take the lead in designing algorithms and evaluation frameworks which avoid discrimination. Autocompleting a field is not something that feels like it would fall under this. Getting rejected by all your banks for a mortgage because they all use the same prediction company would be.