6 ms·

Credit score has a regulated scoring system. It's all based on your debts, and repayment of said debts. You're not going to lose credit score based on your vote

Credit score has a regulated scoring system. It's all based on your debts, and repayment of said debts. You're not going to lose credit score based on your vote.

Mystery-Machine 3y ago
Social score is also not shot put someone's ass. It's calculated based on your criminal record and some other factors. Seems like, as per Wikipedia, it's mostly focused on company social credit scores. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System
- Manuel_D 3y ago
  "...and some other factors." Nice handwaving. From your own link: > In addition to dishonest and fraudulent financial behavior, there has been proposals in some cities to officially list several behaviors as negative factors of credit ratings, including playing loud music or eating in rapid transits,[68] violating traffic rules such as jaywalking and red-light violations,[76][83] making reservations at restaurants or hotels, but not showing up,[86] failing to correctly sort personal waste,[96][97][81] I have no idea why you thought this link would help you make your case. Human rights organizations the world over criticize the social credit score: https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/the-human-rights-implications-of-chinas-social-credit-system/ https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/the-human-rights-implications-of-c...
  - bllguo 3y ago
    the world over? you mean the US and UK? organizations with negligible representation from people who belong to non-Anglo cultures? the social credit myth has been busted plenty of times. it's a cursory search away.
  - peteradio 3y ago
    > proposals in some cities
whimsicalism 3y ago
It’s true that lending is heavily regulated in the US. However I know for a fact that there are startups here that are designing credit scores for foreign markets in developing countries that include all sorts of factors that we would consider bad in the US.
- xwdv 3y ago
  What exactly is wrong with that? How else would you expect to quantify the risk of lending money to some foreign individual? Without such a score, the result is simple: you don’t lend money. If the score can includes factors that increase the odds of positive ROI, that is better for the lender. There is no incentive to make a “biased” score as that would create a market opportunity for someone else. Scores are built to whatever is allowed by regulation or lack thereof.
  - withinboredom 3y ago
    Or, (how it works here), I show them my employment contract and they look at my current debts. If the income:debt ratio is too risky for them ... they say no. It's a bit more invasive for other forms of income (foreign/capital gains/self-employment) in that they want to see bank statements for the last three years and take the average amount coming in as you income. There are no magic scores, or hidden factors. It's just, 'can you afford to feed yourself and pay your mortgage if you buy this house.'
    - dnissley 3y ago
      This seems like semantics. Presumably they're taking these factors and putting them into some kind of calculation which probably outputs something like a... score. Maybe what you are criticizing is a particular input in that calculation? I notice you don't mention repayment of past debts, for example.
      - ohgodplsno 3y ago
        That score doesn't follow you your whole life. There are some files in many countries that list failures to pay off debts, but their access is extremely controlled and subject to verification. My "credit score" exists for 30 minutes while my bank gets my proof of income and ID, and that's it. In the same way, my landlord does not get access to any of these files, because it's none of his business. It is illegal to keep track of individuals like this. In the US, this incentivizes keeping individuals in poverty, and its ease of access means that it is easy for any predatory lending institution to explicitly target people with low credit scores. It creates de facto castes.
pton_xd 3y ago
Loan companies could model a population's exact historical credit risk by combining extensively detailed loan data, right? But they can't use that calculated credit risk to issue loans because it probably contains off-limits attributes like gender, race, religion, etc. What about developing their "clean" model by minimizing errors between it and the actual model? The clean model wouldn't contain any regulated inputs but will be as close as you can get to the real thing. What's the difference, effectively?
- Dylan16807 3y ago
  That depends on what "as close as you can get" means, using just those data points. And whether there's extremely overfit training on recent forbidden parameters with a huge number of degrees of freedom, or whether you have the exact opposite.
- Obscurity4340 3y ago
  Sort of like parallel construction but for companies
waboremo 3y ago
Right, what we trade in regulating the score, we lose in data privacy since all credit scoring systems have no problem fucking around with your data giving it to whoever asks even though there is a tremendous amount of information attached.
SilasX 3y ago
No, it's based on a lot more than that, like how long you've been in the system, and average age of account. This is why you can be radioactive despite never having missed a payment on anything -- because you never carried debt.
- Manuel_D 3y ago
  Correct, if you have no credit history then financial institutions are not as confident in your ability to pay back loans. This is not remotely comparable to reducing people's social credit for associating with political undesirables.
  - SilasX 3y ago
    I wasn't making the comparison, I was correcting a misrepresentation you made about the US credit scoring system only penalizing you for not paying debts.
    - Manuel_D 3y ago
      I never said the system only penalizes you for not paying debts: > It's all based on your debts, and repayment of said debt. Absence of credit history is based on your debt (or more specifically lack thereof).
      - SilasX 3y ago
        And as written, someone that didn't already know about it would make a false inference about what kind of people would be marked as radioactive. I was pre-empting that (very likely) false inference. The fact that you didn't explicitly say the false thing (or that you can cleverly read "based on debts" to mean some non-obvious thing) doesn't obviate the need for that clarification.
        Dylan16807 3y ago
        "Clarifications" shouldn't start with the word "No". It might be non-obvious but the phrasing wasn't deceptive or "clever", it's the system that's weird.
liamtuohyff 3y ago
No, but your company's esg score will
hnfong 3y ago
> You're not going to lose credit score based on your vote. Pretty sure Chinese citizens don't worry about this either.
Tangurena2 3y ago
Only credit scores are regulated. Other rating companies that keep track of who got arrested, or who got evicted have no such regulations. And the ratings agencies that expand upon the credit reporting, like The Work Number, are outside of the laws/regs governing credit scores.

Credit score has a regulated scoring system. It's all based on your debts, and repayment of said debts. You're not going to lose credit score based on your vote.

Mystery-Machine 3y ago

Social score is also not shot put someone's ass. It's calculated based on your criminal record and some other factors. Seems like, as per Wikipedia, it's mostly focused on company social credit scores. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System

Manuel_D 3y ago
"...and some other factors." Nice handwaving. From your own link: > In addition to dishonest and fraudulent financial behavior, there has been proposals in some cities to officially list several behaviors as negative factors of credit ratings, including playing loud music or eating in rapid transits,[68] violating traffic rules such as jaywalking and red-light violations,[76][83] making reservations at restaurants or hotels, but not showing up,[86] failing to correctly sort personal waste,[96][97][81] I have no idea why you thought this link would help you make your case. Human rights organizations the world over criticize the social credit score: https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/the-human-rights-implications-of-chinas-social-credit-system/ https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/the-human-rights-implications-of-c...
- bllguo 3y ago
  the world over? you mean the US and UK? organizations with negligible representation from people who belong to non-Anglo cultures? the social credit myth has been busted plenty of times. it's a cursory search away.
- peteradio 3y ago
  > proposals in some cities

whimsicalism 3y ago

It’s true that lending is heavily regulated in the US. However I know for a fact that there are startups here that are designing credit scores for foreign markets in developing countries that include all sorts of factors that we would consider bad in the US.

xwdv 3y ago
What exactly is wrong with that? How else would you expect to quantify the risk of lending money to some foreign individual? Without such a score, the result is simple: you don’t lend money. If the score can includes factors that increase the odds of positive ROI, that is better for the lender. There is no incentive to make a “biased” score as that would create a market opportunity for someone else. Scores are built to whatever is allowed by regulation or lack thereof.
- withinboredom 3y ago
  Or, (how it works here), I show them my employment contract and they look at my current debts. If the income:debt ratio is too risky for them ... they say no. It's a bit more invasive for other forms of income (foreign/capital gains/self-employment) in that they want to see bank statements for the last three years and take the average amount coming in as you income. There are no magic scores, or hidden factors. It's just, 'can you afford to feed yourself and pay your mortgage if you buy this house.'
  - dnissley 3y ago
    This seems like semantics. Presumably they're taking these factors and putting them into some kind of calculation which probably outputs something like a... score. Maybe what you are criticizing is a particular input in that calculation? I notice you don't mention repayment of past debts, for example.
    - ohgodplsno 3y ago
      That score doesn't follow you your whole life. There are some files in many countries that list failures to pay off debts, but their access is extremely controlled and subject to verification. My "credit score" exists for 30 minutes while my bank gets my proof of income and ID, and that's it. In the same way, my landlord does not get access to any of these files, because it's none of his business. It is illegal to keep track of individuals like this. In the US, this incentivizes keeping individuals in poverty, and its ease of access means that it is easy for any predatory lending institution to explicitly target people with low credit scores. It creates de facto castes.

pton_xd 3y ago

Loan companies could model a population's exact historical credit risk by combining extensively detailed loan data, right? But they can't use that calculated credit risk to issue loans because it probably contains off-limits attributes like gender, race, religion, etc. What about developing their "clean" model by minimizing errors between it and the actual model? The clean model wouldn't contain any regulated inputs but will be as close as you can get to the real thing. What's the difference, effectively?

Dylan16807 3y ago
That depends on what "as close as you can get" means, using just those data points. And whether there's extremely overfit training on recent forbidden parameters with a huge number of degrees of freedom, or whether you have the exact opposite.
Obscurity4340 3y ago
Sort of like parallel construction but for companies

waboremo 3y ago

Right, what we trade in regulating the score, we lose in data privacy since all credit scoring systems have no problem fucking around with your data giving it to whoever asks even though there is a tremendous amount of information attached.

SilasX 3y ago

No, it's based on a lot more than that, like how long you've been in the system, and average age of account. This is why you can be radioactive despite never having missed a payment on anything -- because you never carried debt.

Manuel_D 3y ago
Correct, if you have no credit history then financial institutions are not as confident in your ability to pay back loans. This is not remotely comparable to reducing people's social credit for associating with political undesirables.
- SilasX 3y ago
  I wasn't making the comparison, I was correcting a misrepresentation you made about the US credit scoring system only penalizing you for not paying debts.
  - Manuel_D 3y ago
    I never said the system only penalizes you for not paying debts: > It's all based on your debts, and repayment of said debt. Absence of credit history is based on your debt (or more specifically lack thereof).
    - SilasX 3y ago
      And as written, someone that didn't already know about it would make a false inference about what kind of people would be marked as radioactive. I was pre-empting that (very likely) false inference. The fact that you didn't explicitly say the false thing (or that you can cleverly read "based on debts" to mean some non-obvious thing) doesn't obviate the need for that clarification.
      - Dylan16807 3y ago
        "Clarifications" shouldn't start with the word "No". It might be non-obvious but the phrasing wasn't deceptive or "clever", it's the system that's weird.

liamtuohyff 3y ago

No, but your company's esg score will

hnfong 3y ago

> You're not going to lose credit score based on your vote. Pretty sure Chinese citizens don't worry about this either.

Tangurena2 3y ago

Only credit scores are regulated. Other rating companies that keep track of who got arrested, or who got evicted have no such regulations. And the ratings agencies that expand upon the credit reporting, like The Work Number, are outside of the laws/regs governing credit scores.