On the (im)possibility of fairness · HackerPapers discussions

On the (im)possibility of fairness — mentioned by SpaceManNabs

Mon, 07 Sep 2020 05:27:03 GMT

> we are still focused on defining fairness from the POV of a single judge, and not from the entire integrated awareness of every participant in the community Maybe I am misinterpreting your want, but this could be because some definitions of fairness directly contradict each other in some situations. So some unified view of fairness is not possible (in the view that I think you want). Impossibility of Fairness: https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.07236 There are some frameworks to trade to balance competing fairness definitions (https://www.cs.toronto.edu/~toni/Papers/icml-final.pdf). Somewhat…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

On the (im)possibility of fairness — mentioned by BickNowstrom

Mon, 21 Nov 2016 14:13:25 GMT

Like the line in Fight Club [1] about recalls it is a simple formula: Only if the cost * probability of a PR disaster outweighs the cost of a poor credit risk model, is a bank economically incentivized to not discriminate. Then again, even if you take care to not directly discriminate, you will probably indirectly discriminate. For instance, in your credit risk model, remove the `gender` column from the features, and use the remaining features to try to predict it. If performance is better than random guessing, you are using proxy features (like `income`) to discriminate on `gender`. You will…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

On the (im)possibility of fairness — HN submission

Mon, 07 Nov 2016 23:37:03 GMT

On the (im)possibility of fairness

1 point; 0 discussion replies on HN. Paper and source history. A submission is not an endorsement.