I clicked expecting an actual discussion of "algorithm fairness" in the sense of how a scheduler can be fair (what that means seems to elude me still). Instead

I clicked expecting an actual discussion of "algorithm fairness" in the sense of how a scheduler can be fair (what that means seems to elude me still). Instead of talking about "algorithm fairness", it appears to be talking about "algorithm equality", or alternately "algorithm legal-non-descrimination". I'd expect one could just avoid feeding an algorithm data about enumerated protected classes (for jurisdictions where such a thing exists) and be done with it. Avoiding non-protected-class data that is correlated with protected-classes seems almost contradictory: you'd need to feed the algorithm data about protected classes so it could determine the correlation, and then apply the inverse correlation to to the protected classes. I'm not even sure such a thing is possible to do correctly, though I suppose what I've described is simply a techno implementation of affirmative action.