3 ms·

They might be afraid their algorithms would be too easy to manipulate if you knew all of it's factors. Since testing the all of the possible factors would be co

• justinclift 4y ago
  > They might be afraid ... It's not really relevant what they're afraid of. They should be made to be transparent, and it should be enforced when they don't meet the mark.
  • hampereddustbin 4y ago
    Maybe I used the wrong wording. There may be legitimate reasons for keeping it vague, because designing tamperproof public metrics for credit approval has huge risks involved, or they may be designed so conservatively that a lot actually qualifying people would now be unable to get a loan. I've personally been bitten by the latter despite making nearly six figures. Similarily I've not really seen any sites which publish how their anti-spam filters work or what the treshold values are either for similar reasons. They're possible to figure out, but cost a lot more. Maybe a better solution would be to somehow guarantee that they're consistent with their own rules, and regularly audited so that they're also compliant with the current law?
    • justinclift 4y ago
      > designing tamperproof public metrics for credit approval has huge risks involved The worst scenario that seems to fall out of this is "evolving arms race between bad actors and the metrics". To me, that doesn't seem anywhere near as bad as the (current) lack of transparency.