Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Phill104

Sexist Apple Credit Cards

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

 

Sex does not need to be an input for it to be sexist just like how race doesn't need to be mentioned for a law to be racist. After the civil war many southern states made it so you have to be a 2nd gen land owner or pay a voting tax to prevent black people from voting those laws are racist even when they don't mention a race. If the bank lowers credit limit dramatically if they detect the person is doing something that predominately a woman does like buying make up then it's sexist even when it doesn't have sex as an input

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, CarlBar said:

 

That the catch, is there such a clause ad how well written is it. Personally i have to wonder if this isn't a result of some weird overflow error in the calculations since it seems to be only confirmed with the ultra rich and the difference feels too great to be either deliberate or intended, and an error tied to a situation that should give a very high limit that instead causes a low limit is exactly the sort of thing that could slip through Q&A as it would be such a freak outlier.

 

Also the spellchecker thing is more a "what if from around the turn of the millenium" it wasn't really until post somtime that truly robust spellcheckers became a routine thing. SO it wouldn't be so much the employer forbidding their use in the scenario described as them just not being avalibuile unless he company forked out extra.

 

As the reply above me said, if there's a within good reason clause thats robustly enough written it's not an issue. The problem comes if thats absent or very poorly written as there are times when using those parameters, (e.g. for a wet nurse if you want a sex based one), or one's directly based off them, (like the the young males and car insurance), are completely reasonable things to do with actual factual factors to back them up. I don't think thats whats happening here, (i suspect a bug of some sort that got past Q&A), but there are going to be times when it is reasonable.

Young males and car insurance is not fair at all and the fact that you say that is kinda ridiculous. They are taking a statistic for a group as a whole and applying it to everyone in that group regardless of the individual. I guarantee if the same was done to any other group it would be seen as not ok. If you actually went and based it on driving history and young men had higher insurance rates on average because the ones with bad driving history had higher rates then ok it's a valid and not discriminatory but as soon as you start slapping higher rates on young men simply because they are young men it is absolutely discriminatory. Unfortunately what happens is insurance companies just slap a higher rate on young men even when they have no other reason to do so other than gender and age. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/11/2019 at 4:34 AM, mr moose said:

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.

 

Yep, the way most people are complaining, this is not how credit works. As you say, with a joint account, they don't necessarily know who is the one responsible. So may use other metrics or limit it to the first owner/named customer.

 

Like. It's generally down to individual and history, irrespective of "credit score". If you have no history, they might be reluctant. If you have lots of money and no history, oh, they love that one (hint, you'd not be wanting to borrow anyhow, so they bite your hand off, to get the ball rolling in the hope of getting that big payout in the long run).

 

Or, start small, and build it up. Without seeing the data/forms/customer info, how do we know it's not 1 person doing different than the other? Yes, it probably is an unfair system, but it could be previous address history, age, previous jobs/credit history, or anything. Before we know what it is, we first need to know it is unfair, right?

 

[edit] Clarified I was agreeing with you disagreeing with others, and not disagreeing with you... :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
1 hour ago, Drak3 said:

Provide it. You made a claim, now back it up.

What's the point? There is tons of evidence out there but whatever I link to people will deny it. The usual climate change denier/flat earth believer way of thinking seems to apply here too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In Canada (At least in Sask) Men under 25 and Single are charged higher then their Female counterpart for car insurance. This is a normal fact that when you take in account all accidents and insurance claims that these statistics come out. This isnt inherently sexist its taking known numbers and calculating the chances based on the information provided what the outcomes could be. This isnt 100% for everyone as everyone is different but statistics are statistics. This is how Credit/insurance/banks has always been? Why cant I get better insurance rates and credit loans based on others information are they shaming me based on my financial history or how likely I am going to pay them back?...

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Sauron said:

That's GS' problem, they have the data and the algorithm. Everyone else seems to be doing it just fine and there is plenty of literature on the subject, I'm pretty sure they can manage. A very simple solution would be to just tell the algorithm to ignore the person's gender or keep that piece of data hidden from it - that would instantly solve any gender based discrimination while they work on a more sophisticated solution.

It's not GS' problem, though. It's the customers' problem. It's an assumption that it considers gender at all. Again, since we don't know how the algorithm factors anything, we can't say for sure that gender is the distinguishing factor here. But if we are going to bring forth an accusation, we have to provide the evidence. If we can provide verifiable data to prove out the case, then it might even be worth submitting it to the investigators to correct the issue.

 

57 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

Unfortunately what happens is insurance companies just slap a higher rate on young men even when they have no other reason to do so other than gender and age. 

Are you certain that the absolute only reason for young men having higher insurance rates is because "young" (under 25) and "male" are on the insurance forms? If you have proof of that, it would be worth it to pursue that case, because that would be huge. I don't know how insurance works, only have a vague idea, so I can't say that I'm certain it doesn't.


Spoiler

CPU: Intel i7 6850K

GPU: nVidia GTX 1080Ti (ZoTaC AMP! Extreme)

Motherboard: Gigabyte X99-UltraGaming

RAM: 16GB (2x 8GB) 3000Mhz EVGA SuperSC DDR4

Case: RaidMax Delta I

PSU: ThermalTake DPS-G 750W 80+ Gold

Monitor: Samsung 32" UJ590 UHD

Keyboard: Corsair K70

Mouse: Corsair Scimitar

Audio: Logitech Z200 (desktop); Roland RH-300 (headphones)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, GodSeph said:

In Canada (At least in Sask) Men under 25 and Single are charged higher then their Female counterpart for car insurance. This is a normal fact that when you take in account all accidents and insurance claims that these statistics come out. This isnt inherently sexist its taking known numbers and calculating the chances based on the information provided what the outcomes could be. This isnt 100% for everyone as everyone is different but statistics are statistics. This is how Credit/insurance/banks has always been? Why cant I get better insurance rates and credit loans based on others information are they shaming me based on my financial history or how likely I am going to pay them back?...

but why do men get into more accidents? the insurance companies should figure out those factors and use them. and in fact they do take into account a lot of those factors like how much the person drives and charges people who drive more more. so men are being double charged. also i dont think men are being charged 20 times as much as women for car insurance in canada while here women are getting 20 times less credit limit than men

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Phill104 said:

What's the point?

To prove that there is evidence.

 

31 minutes ago, Phill104 said:

There is tons of evidence out there but whatever I link to people will deny it. The usual climate change denier/flat earth believer way of thinking seems to apply here too.

Yeah @LAwLz isn’t one of those people.


Come Bloody Angel

Break off your chains

And look what I've found in the dirt.

 

Pale battered body

Seems she was struggling

Something is wrong with this world.

 

Fierce Bloody Angel

The blood is on your hands

Why did you come to this world?

 

Everybody turns to dust.

 

Everybody turns to dust.

 

The blood is on your hands.

 

The blood is on your hands!

 

Pyo.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
2 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

but why do men get into more accidents? the insurance companies should figure out those factors and use them. and in fact they do take into account a lot of those factors like how much the person drives and charges people who drive more more. so men are being double charged. also i dont think men are being charged 20 times as much as women for car insurance in canada while here women are getting 20 times less credit limit than men

In 2012 the ECJ made a judgment supposedly stopping the gender gap in car insurance

Quote

Car insurance for women

In the past, car insurance could be priced differently based on gender, but after a European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling came into effect in 2012, insurers can no longer take gender into account when quoting the cost of car insurance.

However in practice after an initial spike things returned to normal. See this article - https://www.moneysupermarket.com/car-insurance/womens/

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The1Dickens said:

It's not GS' problem, though. It's the customers' problem. It's an assumption that it considers gender at all. Again, since we don't know how the algorithm factors anything, we can't say for sure that gender is the distinguishing factor here. But if we are going to bring forth an accusation, we have to provide the evidence. If we can provide verifiable data to prove out the case, then it might even be worth submitting it to the investigators to correct the issue.

Yeah, I'm sure highly accomplished engineers with decades of experience like Steve Wozniak are just guessing here. If they aren't discriminating based on gender then I'm sure they'll have no problem explaining exactly why couples with shared incomes and roughly the same spending habits are getting credit scores an order of magnitude apart. Also this isn't a trial, we can discuss the most likely hypothesis without calling in GS' lawyers. They won't be going to jail over any rant I can type here, that's for sure.

 

As for providing direct evidence for investigators, what are you asking me to do, breach their servers to get a data dump of their customer data and attempt to reverse engineer the credit score system? If that's the bar you need to meet to even suggest there may be foul play then forget ever enforcing anything against a corporation...


...is there a question here? 🤔

sudo chmod -R 000 /*

What is scaling and how does it work? Asus PB287Q unboxing! Console alternatives :D Watch Netflix with Kodi on Arch Linux Sharing folders over the internet using SSH Beginner's Guide To LTT (by iamdarkyoshi)

Sauron'stm Product Scores:

Spoiler

Just a list of my personal scores for some products, in no particular order, with brief comments. I just got the idea to do them so they aren't many for now :)

Don't take these as complete reviews or final truths - they are just my personal impressions on products I may or may not have used, summed up in a couple of sentences and a rough score. All scores take into account the unit's price and time of release, heavily so, therefore don't expect absolute performance to be reflected here.

 

-Lenovo Thinkpad X220 - [8/10]

Spoiler

A durable and reliable machine that is relatively lightweight, has all the hardware it needs to never feel sluggish and has a great IPS matte screen. Downsides are mostly due to its age, most notably the screen resolution of 1366x768 and usb 2.0 ports.

 

-Apple Macbook (2015) - [Garbage -/10]

Spoiler

From my perspective, this product has no redeeming factors given its price and the competition. It is underpowered, overpriced, impractical due to its single port and is made redundant even by Apple's own iPad pro line.

 

-OnePlus X - [7/10]

Spoiler

A good phone for the price. It does everything I (and most people) need without being sluggish and has no particularly bad flaws. The lack of recent software updates and relatively barebones feature kit (most notably the lack of 5GHz wifi, biometric sensors and backlight for the capacitive buttons) prevent it from being exceptional.

 

-Microsoft Surface Book 2 - [Garbage - -/10]

Spoiler

Overpriced and rushed, offers nothing notable compared to the competition, doesn't come with an adequate charger despite the premium price. Worse than the Macbook for not even offering the small plus sides of having macOS. Buy a Razer Blade if you want high performance in a (relatively) light package.

 

-Intel Core i7 2600/k - [9/10]

Spoiler

Quite possibly Intel's best product launch ever. It had all the bleeding edge features of the time, it came with a very significant performance improvement over its predecessor and it had a soldered heatspreader, allowing for efficient cooling and great overclocking. Even the "locked" version could be overclocked through the multiplier within (quite reasonable) limits.

 

-Apple iPad Pro - [5/10]

Spoiler

A pretty good product, sunk by its price (plus the extra cost of the physical keyboard and the pencil). Buy it if you don't mind the Apple tax and are looking for a very light office machine with an excellent digitizer. Particularly good for rich students. Bad for cheap tinkerers like myself.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
3 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

To prove that there is evidence.

 

Yeah @LAwLz isn’t one of those people.

Not saying she is. There are tons of articles out there, feel free to look them up.

 

Also remember the gender pay gap is not the same thing as equal pay for equal job, the latter the differences are smaller.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Phill104 said:

In 2012 the ECJ made a judgment supposedly stopping the gender gap in car insurance

However in practice after an initial spike things returned to normal. See this article - https://www.moneysupermarket.com/car-insurance/womens/

yes on average women will still pay less because of factors like how much they drive etc which is expected. but the difference is that if a man drive as much as the average for women and he fits other factors also then he would be charged as much as the average woman instead of having his insurance premium artificially increased just because hes a man

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Sauron said:

If that's the bar you need to meet to even suggest there may be foul play then forget ever enforcing anything against a corporation

That should be the bar though. Courts can get warrants and subpoenas to see whatever documentation they require. 
 

If they can’t prove without a shadow of a doubt that the GS algorithm discriminates based on pure gender alone, there isn’t a case. 


Laptop: 2016 13" nTB MacBook Pro Core i5 | Phone: iPhone 8 Plus 64GB | Wearables: Apple Watch Sport Series 2 | CPU: R5 2600 | Mobo: ASRock B450M Pro4 | RAM: 16GB 2666 | GPU: Sapphire Nitro+ RX 580 4GB | Case: Apple PowerMac G5 | OS: Win 10 | Storage: 480GB PNY SSD & 2TB WD Green HDD | PSU: Corsair CX600M | Display: Dell UZ2215H 21.5" 1080p, ViewSonic VX2450wm-LED 23.6" 1080p, Samsung SyncMaster 940BX 19" 1024p | Cooling: Wraith Prism | Keyboard: G610 Orion Cherry MX Brown | Mouse: G303 | Audio: Audio Technica ATH-M50X & Blue Snowball
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, spartaman64 said:

but why do men get into more accidents? the insurance companies should figure out those factors and use them. and in fact they do take into account a lot of those factors like how much the person drives and charges people who drive more more. so men are being double charged. also i dont think men are being charged 20 times as much as women for car insurance in canada while here women are getting 20 times less credit limit than men

Insurance companies are exactly that, a company. They do not care about what is causing the accidents or how to stop them. They give that information to either the government or companies that do want to look into reducing the causes. We pay insurance companies for exactly whats in the name insurance in case we do have a accident we do not have to pay and go into extreme debt for what could be nobody's direct fault. They too need to make money as they are not a charity. I just think there are much better things to look at then how insurance/bank calculations could be considered "Sexist"... This has been around for so long and people complain because the Apple credit card is doing the same thing lol... Just silly to single them out....

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

To prove that there is evidence.

 

Yeah @LAwLz isn’t one of those people.

if a company releases a new drug and 5000 people uses it and 2500 of them die from heart attacks. do we know for sure that the drug caused the heart attack and why it did? no but its still going to get pulled from shelves and put under investigation and you can be fairly sure that something in the drug helped cause the heart attack even without knowing how. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, GodSeph said:

Insurance companies are exactly that, a company. They do not care about what is causing the accidents or how to stop them. They give that information to either the government or companies that do want to look into reducing the causes. We pay insurance companies for exactly whats in the name insurance in case we do have a accident we do not have to pay and go into extreme debt for what could be nobody's direct fault. They too need to make money as they are not a charity. I just think there are much better things to look at then how insurance/bank calculations could be considered "Sexist"... This has been around for so long and people complain because the Apple credit card is doing the same thing lol... Just silly to single them out....

except as i said insurance companies are not charging men 2000% more on their premiums if that was the case you can be sure lots of people will be demanding something to be done about it. if women are just getting like 5% lower credit limit then i wouldnt think its a big problem but 2000%? that is just ridiculous 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Yeah, I'm sure highly accomplished engineers with decades of experience like Steve Wozniak are just guessing here. If they aren't discriminating based on gender then I'm sure they'll have no problem explaining exactly why couples with shared incomes and roughly the same spending habits are getting credit scores an order of magnitude apart. Also this isn't a trial, we can discuss the most likely hypothesis without calling in GS' lawyers. They won't be going to jail over any rant I can type here, that's for sure.

 

As for providing direct evidence for investigators, what are you asking me to do, breach their servers to get a data dump of their customer data and attempt to reverse engineer the credit score system? If that's the bar you need to meet to even suggest there may be foul play then forget ever enforcing anything against a corporation...

Since it is difficult to determine how AI reaches its conclusion in many cases, it won't necessarily be easy, or even possible. And while this isn't a trial, and I also agree nobody will go to jail (or even be fined) based on what we discuss here, there is no harm in following a procedure that isn't based on speculation and assumptions, because the only thing that accomplishes is becoming unnecessarily frustrated. As for it being from Steve Wozniak, the conjecture doesn't make it infallible. It must still be analyzed with due process. Again, though, I will point out how eerily accurate a profile your receipts, with no identifiable information on them, can generate.

 

And no, I'm not asking you to breach servers or anything like that. But there have been cases where someone not directly involved with a case was able to provide evidence that directly impacted the outcome. So, I would hope, if anyone had any, it would be submitted, but that could just be wishful thinking on my part.


Spoiler

CPU: Intel i7 6850K

GPU: nVidia GTX 1080Ti (ZoTaC AMP! Extreme)

Motherboard: Gigabyte X99-UltraGaming

RAM: 16GB (2x 8GB) 3000Mhz EVGA SuperSC DDR4

Case: RaidMax Delta I

PSU: ThermalTake DPS-G 750W 80+ Gold

Monitor: Samsung 32" UJ590 UHD

Keyboard: Corsair K70

Mouse: Corsair Scimitar

Audio: Logitech Z200 (desktop); Roland RH-300 (headphones)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Phill104 said:

feel free to look them up.

You made the claim, the burden of proof is on you.


Come Bloody Angel

Break off your chains

And look what I've found in the dirt.

 

Pale battered body

Seems she was struggling

Something is wrong with this world.

 

Fierce Bloody Angel

The blood is on your hands

Why did you come to this world?

 

Everybody turns to dust.

 

Everybody turns to dust.

 

The blood is on your hands.

 

The blood is on your hands!

 

Pyo.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The1Dickens said:

 

ok take gender out of the picture. two people share a bank account and one person has a better credit score than the other but the other person gets 20 times the credit limit. just looking at that you can tell something is flawed in the program. if one day you go on youtube and you only can see cat videos wouldnt you think oh something in youtube's algorithm is broken even if you dont know exactly what 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

except as i said insurance companies are not charging men 2000% more on their premiums if that was the case you can be sure lots of people will be demanding something to be done about it. if women are just getting like 5% lower credit limit then i wouldnt think its a big problem but 2000%? that is just ridiculous 

Where are you getting 2000% for my example? I said Men where charged higher but I didnt specify 2000%? Im sure if someone was charged $1000 a month for being Male someone would notice? if you take anything to the extreme to make a point it will work. Banks hate X race as they charge 2000% interest for First time home buyers of Race X. Of course someone would be mad about that. The twitter post that started all this says "10X the credit limit" without any information or proof, since putting any could put financial information on the internet. I am sure he is hyperbolic over the amount difference, and the actual amount is most likely within reason. 

There could have been an issue with the algorithm but again. We are talking about Apple who said that battery life degradation is a feature. I wouldn't trust them anywhere near my finances.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, GodSeph said:

Where are you getting 2000% for my example? I said Men where charged higher but I didnt specify 2000%? Im sure if someone was charged $1000 a month for being Male someone would notice? if you take anything to the extreme to make a point it will work. Banks hate X race as they charge 2000% interest for First time home buyers of Race X. Of course someone would be mad about that. The twitter post that started all this says "10X the credit limit" without any information or proof, since putting any could put financial information on the internet. I am sure he is hyperbolic over the amount difference, and the actual amount is most likely within reason. 

There could have been an issue with the algorithm but again. We are talking about Apple who said that battery life degradation is a feature. I wouldn't trust them anywhere near my finances.....

im getting the 2000% from the fact that men are getting 2000% more credit limit than their wives with joint finances and the wife having a better credit score

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, The1Dickens said:

Since it is difficult to determine how AI reaches its conclusion in many cases, it won't necessarily be easy, or even possible.

It's VERY easy, just don't tell it what the customer's gender is. I suppose it could still get clues from things like receipts for tampons, but not as soon as you register it - and the rate of reduction would most likely be a lot slower.

 

Also, I doubt GS would go bankrupt if they didn't fine tune your credit score based on what exactly you buy when you go grocery shopping, so maybe we can remove that parameter from the equation, too.

16 minutes ago, The1Dickens said:

So, I would hope, if anyone had any, it would be submitted, but that could just be wishful thinking on my part.

Would the multiple complaints filed about this be enough?


...is there a question here? 🤔

sudo chmod -R 000 /*

What is scaling and how does it work? Asus PB287Q unboxing! Console alternatives :D Watch Netflix with Kodi on Arch Linux Sharing folders over the internet using SSH Beginner's Guide To LTT (by iamdarkyoshi)

Sauron'stm Product Scores:

Spoiler

Just a list of my personal scores for some products, in no particular order, with brief comments. I just got the idea to do them so they aren't many for now :)

Don't take these as complete reviews or final truths - they are just my personal impressions on products I may or may not have used, summed up in a couple of sentences and a rough score. All scores take into account the unit's price and time of release, heavily so, therefore don't expect absolute performance to be reflected here.

 

-Lenovo Thinkpad X220 - [8/10]

Spoiler

A durable and reliable machine that is relatively lightweight, has all the hardware it needs to never feel sluggish and has a great IPS matte screen. Downsides are mostly due to its age, most notably the screen resolution of 1366x768 and usb 2.0 ports.

 

-Apple Macbook (2015) - [Garbage -/10]

Spoiler

From my perspective, this product has no redeeming factors given its price and the competition. It is underpowered, overpriced, impractical due to its single port and is made redundant even by Apple's own iPad pro line.

 

-OnePlus X - [7/10]

Spoiler

A good phone for the price. It does everything I (and most people) need without being sluggish and has no particularly bad flaws. The lack of recent software updates and relatively barebones feature kit (most notably the lack of 5GHz wifi, biometric sensors and backlight for the capacitive buttons) prevent it from being exceptional.

 

-Microsoft Surface Book 2 - [Garbage - -/10]

Spoiler

Overpriced and rushed, offers nothing notable compared to the competition, doesn't come with an adequate charger despite the premium price. Worse than the Macbook for not even offering the small plus sides of having macOS. Buy a Razer Blade if you want high performance in a (relatively) light package.

 

-Intel Core i7 2600/k - [9/10]

Spoiler

Quite possibly Intel's best product launch ever. It had all the bleeding edge features of the time, it came with a very significant performance improvement over its predecessor and it had a soldered heatspreader, allowing for efficient cooling and great overclocking. Even the "locked" version could be overclocked through the multiplier within (quite reasonable) limits.

 

-Apple iPad Pro - [5/10]

Spoiler

A pretty good product, sunk by its price (plus the extra cost of the physical keyboard and the pencil). Buy it if you don't mind the Apple tax and are looking for a very light office machine with an excellent digitizer. Particularly good for rich students. Bad for cheap tinkerers like myself.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

but why do men get into more accidents? the insurance companies should figure out those factors and use them. and in fact they do take into account a lot of those factors like how much the person drives and charges people who drive more more. so men are being double charged. also i dont think men are being charged 20 times as much as women for car insurance in canada while here women are getting 20 times less credit limit than men

 

They get into more accidents because on average they're more reckless. As for why that is, no one's sure, where getting into complex brain functionality. Hormones are definitely a factor but beyond that where genuinely not sure. We don;t know enough about how the brain works to run any kind of test to figure it out. Trust me if they could figure out precisely who to charge more from they would, it's in their best interests to do it that way as it gives them a pricing advantage with all those who aren't more likely to get into an accident.

 

And if you still think it's unfair does that mean your okay with paying more on your car insurance so that all those young men having the extra accidents can receive their compensation without bankrupting your insurer. Just because a company is suddenly hypothetically incapable of charging young males more doesn't mean that they will magically stop paying them more on average, so that lost income to cover their payout costs has to come out of everyone else's premiums.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CarlBar said:

 

They get into more accidents because on average they're more reckless. As for why that is, no one's sure, where getting into complex brain functionality. Hormones are definitely a factor but beyond that where genuinely not sure. We don;t know enough about how the brain works to run any kind of test to figure it out. Trust me if they could figure out precisely who to charge more from they would, it's in their best interests to do it that way as it gives them a pricing advantage with all those who aren't more likely to get into an accident.

 

And if you still think it's unfair does that mean your okay with paying more on your car insurance so that all those young men having the extra accidents can receive their compensation without bankrupting your insurer. Just because a company is suddenly hypothetically incapable of charging young males more doesn't mean that they will magically stop paying them more on average, so that lost income to cover their payout costs has to come out of everyone else's premiums.

You stop that. You stop your use of logic!


Come Bloody Angel

Break off your chains

And look what I've found in the dirt.

 

Pale battered body

Seems she was struggling

Something is wrong with this world.

 

Fierce Bloody Angel

The blood is on your hands

Why did you come to this world?

 

Everybody turns to dust.

 

Everybody turns to dust.

 

The blood is on your hands.

 

The blood is on your hands!

 

Pyo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@spartaman64 

My example was for car insurance in my province which isnt 2000% difference... Plus an analyst looked at the reasoning for the Apple card:

Quote

Without access to the Goldman Sachs computers, it's impossible to be certain of what is going on. The fact there appears to be a correlation between gender and credit doesn't necessarily mean one is causing the other. Even so, the suspicion is that unintentional bias has crept into the system.

That could be because when the algorithms involved were developed, they were trained on a data set in which women indeed posed a greater financial risk than the men. This could cause the software to spit out lower credit limits for women in general, even if the assumption it is based on is not true for the population at large.

Alternatively, the problem might lie in the data the algorithms are now being fed. For example, within married couples, men might be more likely to take out big loans solely using their name rather than having done so jointly, and the data may not have been adjusted to take this into account.

Also the bank behind the apple card addressed it:

Quote

Apple Card only offers individual accounts and it is possible for two family members to receive significantly different credit decisions, a Goldman spokesman said. “In all cases, we have not and will not make decisions based on factors like gender,”

Since the family had only finances together it could have singled 1 of the couple out and seeing that they would then have 0 financial information as it defaulted the information to the 2nd spouse, Since they shared ALL banking information the apple card could have seen 1 of them as having no information thus this would explain why 1 spouse had higher credit then the other. 

This would be seen when a teenage signs up for his first credit card. I would only assume their limit is 10 times less then someone who has stronger financial information. This could have been why this happened. Did the couple put their names in order when signing documents? Was the first name chosen and the husband coincidental signed first? There is alot of variables to consider. To see if there is a giant disparity for sexes would be difficult as you would need a blind assortment of users where the ONLY difference is the sex of the user which would be hard to do as finances are never that easy...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×