3 ms·
I am not aware of models that use birth month to make loan decisions, but if that's a useful predictor, why not include it? Because it’s radically unfair to do
by jrmg 4y ago
I am not aware of models that use birth month to make loan decisions, but if that's a useful predictor, why not include it?
Because it’s radically unfair to do that! You’re seriously suggesting that some people should be penalized for the day they were born?
Taking the point more seriously, it’s hard to believe that the risks for whatever you’re ensuring have populations of people each month that are so different that a random person from each has a risk associated with them that birth month, as a signal, isn’t likely to discriminate unfairly almost as much as it helps. Naively, it’s likely to unfairly penalize almost half the population. Maybe you’re prepared to accept that because, hey, it’s right over half the time, but tell that to the vast population you’re penalizing.
And some things just shouldn’t be included. Health insurance, for example: isn’t it unfair to include risk of cancer caused by genetic factors in premium calculations? I guess you could say that’s different because parents could control birth month, but, man, that just seems so uncaring to me.
In the race example, let’s say there is a discrepancy in the underlying stats now, but it’s caused by structural problems in society caused by racism in the past. By using that as a signal to discriminate now it makes it more unlikely that the problems will ever be resolved (example: Black people cant get loans as easily, so can’t start businesses as easily, so the wealth gap is reinforced). If you think that’s ethical I would suggest that you are considering statistics too much and people too little.
- dekhn 4y agoIf there was a reason for people to be higher statistical risk based on birth month (say, "babies born in november had 0.5% higher risk of long-term respiratory disease") then, yes, that should be incorporated into a model. Genetic risk of cancer cannot be included in insurance decisions (excluding voluntary life insurance) because a law was passed (GINA) preventing it. It's not the role of the loan industry to make it easier for black people who appear to be a higher statistical risk to get loans. That's the purpose of government- to make it illegal to include genetic history in life insurance models- provided that society believes in that principle.
- jrmg 4y agoIt's not the role of the loan industry to make it easier for black people who appear to be a higher statistical risk to get loans. That's the purpose of government- to make it illegal to include genetic history in life insurance models- provided that society believes in that principle. Another way to say that - one that appears less uncaring to readers - would be “yes, including birth month or race in insurance risk calculations would be unfair+, so it should not be done. If necessary, the government should step in to prevent this”. + you may squabble with the use of ‘unfair’ here - obviously it is not ‘unfair’ in the stastical sense, but that’s not what the word generally means in spoken English. ‘Inequitable’ would be better, but for some reason ‘equity’ seems to be evolving to mean ‘at all costs, produces equality of outcome’ and so is a victim to the same problem in the opposite direction. I chose the more common word. [edit: I used insurance here, sorry - the same would apply to loans I think]
- jrmg 4y agoI’ve been thinking about this more, and it’s occurred to me that there is an underlying assumption in It’s not he purpose of the loan industry… that corporations are required to make decisions amorally - which is don’t think is or should be the case. That may be an underlying schism in our argument.
- dekhn 4y agoYou are correct. I expect that corporations understand they exist in a competitive environment and incorporating morality represents a real risk that your competitor will replace you, because morality is not profitable. I do agree that if you expect corporations to act morally, then it would be sensible for them to be more careful in understanding and correcting long-term social ills.
- mcguire 4y agoIs it the role of the loan industry to make it more difficult for black people to get loans, regardless of whether the individual is a higher statistical risk? (Apparently so, since that's the way it's always worked, right?) It is trivial to bake an irrelevant distinction into a naive ML driven process.