Sexist Apple Credit Cards

[Sauron]

58 minutes ago, Andreas Lilja said:

I mean the difference for the same job seems negligible, they don't seem to account for hours worked.

 

https://www.payscale.com/gender-lifetime-earnings-gap

It doesn't specifically mention hours worked but it does say it's an "apples to apples" comparison so it would be pretty egregious if it didn't. It also doesn't mention sample size and the algorithm used to study the data is proprietary, which doesn't really add to its credibility. More importantly it doesn't mention WHERE that data was taken, which makes this a little useless; regardless it shows a difference beyond the margin of error. An extra $2k a year isn't negligible and either way since they only cite software developers we can't really infer whether that's just a fluke.

 

On the other hand, just looking at the sources on the wikipedia page for the "pay gap" we find this proper metaanalysis which places the worldwide wage gap at around 30% at the time of publishing with a rate of reduction of about 0.17% per year, which would still place it well above 25% today. Again, the specifics will vary per country and per job/job type - but on average, women earn less than men working the same job.

 

The wikipedia page itself contains PLENTY of information and citations from extremely reputable sources. The scientific consensus is extremely clear - the wage gap is real and significant across the world.

[Drak3]

1 hour ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

But hey, 2019, everything is sexist/racist/whatever-ist.

Now you’re getting it.

[Sauron]

1 hour ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Even if that was the case, I still wouldn't call the algorithm sexist. I would call it broken.

It's broken in a way that disfavors based on sex, so by definition it's sexist. Sexism doesn't need to be the consequence of direct hate to be harmful. Obviously it's not sentient and it doesn't have a personal vendetta against women, nobody is saying that.

[mr moose]

I wonder if they would use the same algorithm in Australia.   I haven't had a CC in a bloody long time, but when I did I only got offered more credit and higher limits when I had a constant debt on the card.   The only way I can see them settling this dispute is to lay the algorithm out bare for everyone to see and examine it to find out why.

[SenKa]

2 hours ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Huh, weird. But as I said maybe the algorithm noticed that the man made more transactions so he might need a higher limit? I doubt it goes if person=female then credit limit=credit limit/10.

 

EDIT: Even if that was the case, I still wouldn't call the algorithm sexist. I would call it broken. Algorithms just take data and make a decisions based on that data. There's a good chance that if it was indeed discriminating against women, it made that decision not because it hates women, but because based on the data it collected, it may have deemed women less trustworthy than men. If that is the case, I think it definitely needs to be adjusted to decide on a person by person basis, instead of grouping people together.

 

53 minutes ago, Sauron said:

It's broken in a way that disfavors based on sex, so by definition it's sexist. Sexism doesn't need to be the consequence of direct hate to be harmful. Obviously it's not sentient and it doesn't have a personal vendetta against women, nobody is saying that.

If PCGuy is correct, then it is not broken in a way that disfavors based off sex in such a way that it is designed at such. The sex that has been disfavored have proven themselves to be unfavorable, hypothetically.

 

Teach an algorithm a certain way it will never know it's wrong, even if it is. Trash in, trash out.

 

Something something computer calculated algorithms only serve by being cheaper than people cranking out numbers something something sexist AC systems.

[mr moose]

5 minutes ago, Caroline said:

butbutbut muh wage gap iz real!!!! I don't wanna work but get paid more than the CEO!!1! rreee

In Australia they don't use actual pay per hours worked to calculate the gap, they use annualized wages provided by employers.  So who fucking knows what the truth is.

[captain_to_fire]

3 hours ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

But hey, 2019, everything is sexist/racist/whatever-ist.

Did...did...did you just assumed my gender? 

 

/s 

[xtroria]

With almost any case where someone is getting accused of being racist / sexist, the data needs to be checked first. In this case, it should be really easy to check the correlation.

 

If the average men applying for apple card is earning higher income and have better credit score vs the women, my only respond is well DUH of course they will be offered higher limit

 

If the average earning income is the same, or even the women are earning higher & the women have better average credit score, then we can start talking about pointing finger to possible sexism.

[ARikozuM]

4 minutes ago, xtroria said:

With almost any case where someone is getting accused of being racist / sexist, the data needs to be checked first. In this case, it should be really easy to check the correlation.

 

If the average men applying for apple card is earning higher income and have better credit score vs the women, my only respond is well DUH of course they will be offered higher limit

 

If the average earning income is the same, or even the women are earning higher & the women have better average credit score, then we can start talking about pointing finger to possible sexism.

 

The guy got 20x the limit... That's not a mistake unless the guy got hit with the mistake. I don't trust any algorithms that aren't publicly vetted and nor should you.

[Founders]

Wow... People are really running out of things to bitch about. It's completely irreverent what others are getting, just worry about yourself, life's easier that way.  

• Get a credit card 
• Don't buy anything you can't afford 
• Your credit limit/line will increase overtime
• build your credit and borrowing ability  

[Belgarathian]

6 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Remember how car insurance has been higher for men for years and no one gave a damn. One woman gets lower credit limit and everyone loses their shit...

Well yes, but my understanding is that there is data to support that men are higher risk hence higher premiums. 

 

The data surrounding the investigation seems to be that only gender is significantly different, particularly when it comes to credit scores, income, etc as they were all join applications with shared accounts. 

[Belgarathian]

5 hours ago, ARikozuM said:

Anecdotal, but my mother and I both have phenomenal credit scores (762 me, ~800 her). She's had her cards for far longer than I have by a decade's minimum and I still have a card with a higher limit than her. Her credit history and mine are completely clean without late payments or high balance (aside from 3 hard checks for me). 

I wonder if how the scores are calculated differs significantly between your country and mine as mine is 974.

 

Maybe I have more debt.

[ARikozuM]

14 minutes ago, Belgarathian said:

I wonder if how the scores are calculated differs significantly between your country and mine as mine is 974.

 

Maybe I have more debt.

No idea. Here the max score for Transunion is 860. Don't know about the rest. 

[Taf the Ghost]

58 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

 

The guy got 20x the limit... That's not a mistake unless the guy got hit with the mistake. I don't trust any algorithms that aren't publicly vetted and nor should you.

So, rather than being sexist, it's more like bad QA. Which is normally always the problem in software development.

[ARikozuM]

2 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

So, rather than being sexist, it's more like bad QA. Which is normally always the problem in software development.

it could, but this shouldn't have happened regardless. Glitches in a system for credit should not occur. We don't know what the normal limit is either. Until they give the algo, we can't be sure. We have a lot of instances of algos leading to bias for some and not others, so I think questioning is better than letting them continue. 

[Taf the Ghost]

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

I wonder if they would use the same algorithm in Australia.   I haven't had a CC in a bloody long time, but when I did I only got offered more credit and higher limits when I had a constant debt on the card.   The only way I can see them settling this dispute is to lay the algorithm out bare for everyone to see and examine it to find out why.

Credit Scores and Credit Limits are dictated by a statistical model designed to extract the most money out of the person with the Card. Part of this discussion is really dictated by mass-scale propaganda about Purchasing Power & Wealth that just isn't true. Also, for the rich guys with massive credit scores, they do realize "Income" is calculated as part of any Credit Limit situation, right? I'd bet they don't want to talk about the weird tax shelters they're using that likely caused this issue.

[yolosnail]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

In Australia they don't use actual pay per hours worked to calculate the gap, they use annualized wages provided by employers.  So who fucking knows what the truth is.

Same here, the media seem to use the average of all men and all women to calculate the gap rather than calculating it on a per job basis. 

 

Higher paid jobs are usually higher skill, more dangerous or more time consuming, all of which men are more likely to want to do. That's not to say there are no women in time consuming, highly skilled dangerous jobs!

 

A man and a woman might be doing the same job, but if the man can do the work 20% faster, then should he be entitled to being paid 20% more or should he be paid the same as the woman who is doing less? (Assuming the woman is average and the man is 20% above average) 

 

Even in the same job, it's not as simple as saying women pay = men pay. Every employee is worth a different amount, no two men will be worth the same, never mind a man and a woman. It all depends on what skills they bring to the table, what experience they have, their enthusiasm or willingness to 'climb the ranks'.

 

This is why I'm very much against 'equality' (not to be confused with equal opportunity), these days companies are paying more attention to gender and ethnicity, and not in a good way. There are plenty of cases where companies at hiring less qualified, less experienced people from a minority background over a while person who is measurably better for the job just so they can meet their quota. 

 

If I want to hire a straight white mail over a blue haired black lesbian woman who identifies as a penguin, I bloody well will! Not because they're a white male, but because they will be a better fit for the job

[Taf the Ghost]

Just now, ARikozuM said:

it could, but this shouldn't have happened regardless. Glitches in a system for credit should not occur. We don't know what the normal limit is either. Until they give the algo, we can't be sure. We have a lot of instances of algos leading to bias for some and not others, so I think questioning is better than letting them continue. 

The real-world isn't some infinitely sorted distribution system. A properly done financial algorithm is simply a stand-in for good actuarial work done via computation. An unbiased algo will simply reflect reality as it is. They aren't magic tools.

 

That being said, considering its the wives of rich men, odds are the system is counting the husband's income as solely his rather than doubling it up, seeing as these are apparently individual accounts rather than shared accounts.

[Kisai]

5 hours ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

No. They have ONLY shared finances and their limits were still an order of magnitude different.

 

That's how we know it is a real issue.

 

Basically all their other cards are said to have the same limits.

 

It might actually be the opposite. It's giving Woz a higher credit limit because of what the credit record shows his name being first on documents or something. 

 

That's really the only reason to come away from this. The algorithm probably didn't learn who is male or female, but rather that the first person on credit records is more likely to buy more if they have a larger credit limit.

 

As a FYI, I have a very very good credit record, better than my parents, and haven't taken a loan out in 15 years. YET that's not good enough to get a loan from like anyone because apparently they only think you're good with credit if you're in debt up to your eyeballs or have platinum credit cards (needing 80K+/yr income levels)

[Bacon soup]

Stop asking for gender & race on every fucking form. Is it hard to not ask for these things? I just applied for a job that wanted me to state my gender identity. Bigots didnt let me choose Queen of England.

[Bacon soup]

9 minutes ago, Kisai said:

As a FYI, I have a very very good credit record, better than my parents, and haven't taken a loan out in 15 years. YET that's not good enough to get a loan from like anyone because apparently they only think you're good with credit if you're in debt up to your eyeballs or have platinum credit cards (needing 80K+/yr income levels)

I'm not an expert on this, but I think credit scores work on how well you make payments. You can't make payments if you don't borrow.

[DrMacintosh]

So I’m trying to find where the evidence is? I only see speculation. 
 

Credit is on a per Social Security # basis and takes into account your history with money. A Wife and a Husband will have different credit limits even if they work the same job, but it’s not because of Gender. It’s because one of the two is usually more financially responsible than the other. Thats usually the husband. 
 

It’s not sexist, it’s reality. 

[poochyena]

7 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Remember how car insurance has been higher for men for years and no one gave a damn.

really? I hear people complain about it relentlessly, and its even gotten banned on some places.

[mr moose]

42 minutes ago, DrMacintosh said:

So I’m trying to find where the evidence is? I only see speculation. 
 

Credit is on a per Social Security # basis and takes into account your history with money. A Wife and a Husband will have different credit limits even if they work the same job, but it’s not because of Gender. It’s because one of the two is usually more financially responsible than the other. Thats usually the husband. 
 

It’s not sexist, it’s reality. 

I think the problem is that a wife and husband seem to have different credit limits even though they share the same bank account and she has a better credit rating. Steve Wozniak said the same thing happened to him and his wife.    When a couple uses a single account it is impossible to know who is more responsible with money just from the numbers.

 

[LAwLz]

Remember when Amazon's machine learning recruitment was called "sexist" for recommending hiring men over women? As it turned out, in Amazon's case the machine wasn't even being fed the gender of the applicant. It looked at a ton of different variables and it just so happened that far more men than women were suitable for the job, in a completely unbiased way.

But we humans then looked at the result, and since we humans LOVE to find patterns, we applied our own bias of "women are just as capable as men and should therefore be recommended 50% of the time!" and then concluded that it must be sexist.

 

Do we even know what data was used to determine the credit score for the Apple credit card? It can't be sexist if it doesn't take gender in as a factor. And if it does then it probably looks at statistics to draw conclusion. Like someone said earlier, nobody has a problem with men having to pay more for car insurance because "statistically they are higher risks". If that's okay, why shouldn't it be okay to give women a lower credit limit if they statistically and in general doesn't have the same spending power/credit score as men?