SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Computers aren't just doing hard math problems and showing us cat videos. Increasingly, they judge our character. Maybe we should be grateful.
A company in Palo Alto, Calif., called Upstart has over the last 15 months lent $135 million to people with mostly negligible credit ratings. Typically, they are recent graduates without mortgages, car payments or credit card settlements.
Those are among the things that normally earn a good or bad credit score, but these people haven't been in the working world that long. So Upstart looks at their SAT scores, what colleges they attended, their majors and their grade-point averages. As much as job prospects, the company is assessing personality.
The idea, validated by data, is that people who did things like double-checking the homework or studying extra in case there was a pop quiz are thorough and likely to honor their debts.
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/07/26/using-algorithms-to-determine-character/
[Other Companies Involved With Similar Programs]: ZestFinance , Workday
(Score: 2) by vux984 on Monday July 27 2015, @09:54PM
It takes two parties to make a bad loan. The bank giving it and the person taking it.
Wile that is true. The party with the cash takes the risk that the party they are lending it to will default. The compensation for taking that risk is the interest. The higher the interest, the more risk the lender is prepared to take. That is the fundamental nature of lending.
If there is one thing to learn in the banking world is that the banks do *NOT* have your best interests at heart.
Of course not.
Given all of that? The risk is on you. YOU have to have the means and spine to pay it back. If you are going into it to rip off the bank what does that say about you?
Honestly. It says nothing about you. If someone lends me money, my decision to default or not default on the payment should be made with my self interest at heart. If the consequence of defaulting is a more favorable outcome to me than not defaulting than I should default.
If the bank gives me money on such unfavorable terms that i am better off defaulting, then that poor judgement is on them.
At this point the only one who has to prove they have integrity is you
My integrity is irrelevant; and not related to this decision. Defaulting on a debt is not a criminal act. Defaulting is not an immoral act.
I dont care about them. I care about what YOU do.
Why do you care whether I make the sound financial decision to default on a debt that is not worth repaying? I didn't assume that risk, the lender did. They factored into their expected returns the risk that I would default.