4 ms·
Isn't that the logical consequence of having laws that forbid disparate impact on protected classes? One could also argue that a person's attributes that are n
by Tarq0n 9y ago
Isn't that the logical consequence of having laws that forbid disparate impact on protected classes?
One could also argue that a person's attributes that are not the result of choice should not be used to assess them, because they reflect historical and environmental influences rather than personal ones.
- grandmczeb 9y agoIt may not be “fair” in some cosmic sense, but traits that you don’t have control over are important for lots of things you want to assess. For example, should modeling agencies not take into account physical appearance?
- maldeh 9y agoAdditionally, this extends to the usage of latent or inferred variables that behave as a proxy to a protected class - so neural networks and other discriminative approaches outside of a distinctly diagnosable decision tree, could be in a rather grey area legally if used for credit scores, etc. It's possible that the upshot of a legal challenge could be a crippling cap on the accuracy of models as they explicitly avoid any information derived from any protected factors.