4 ms·
They can set offers however they like and you are free to not accept. If the algorithm detects that you are likely to accept for little money and short you wit
by cryptonym 2y ago
They can set offers however they like and you are free to not accept.
If the algorithm detects that you are likely to accept for little money and short you with lower offers compared to other users, is it still morally fine?
- lupire 2y agoUnsure, but why would they do that? Why risk paying more by making a higher offer elsewhere before making a lower offer?
- error_logic 2y agoLook to two-tailed tests when a flipside doesn't make sense. Consider what risk might exist if you fear overpaying so much that you make a lowball offer yet someone feels compelled to accept. The product or service might be "done" but in a way that screws you over in the long run as well. Trust is earned, and it flows both ways.
- error_logic 2y agoThis runs into both the ideals and the limitations of the Free Market. Ideally, there's incentive for people to collectively reach the most efficient solution through aggregated laziness and greed. In practice, people only have so much bandwidth and shortcuts will be taken, options will be overlooked, and people will exploit or be exploited due to the blinders either put on willingly or forced on them--on top of our natural capacity for observing reality no matter how much information is provided.
- NovemberWhiskey 2y agoOther than the algorithmic aspect, isn't that basically exactly how the employment market works?
- smabie 2y agoSure, this is how negotiate and hiring have always worked.
- cryptonym 2y agoSome companies underpaying part of their staff for the same job doesn't make it moral. In some cases, it tends to correlate with genetics which makes it even more questionable. A black box algorithm may unknowingly introduce such bias. Anyway what is moral depends on your personal values, not the law nor how things are done, it's expected to disagree.