Hacker News Reader

Comment by gumby | Hacker News Reader

I’m pretty sure Equifax et al aggregate this info as well (well perhaps not yet your trash-sorting) such as arrest records and probably social media activity as an option, or future option, to swizzle into credit rating.

View on HN

Your credit rating doesn't affect your ability to go to a concert or buy an airline ticket.

Not today— it doesn’t seem like a terrible stretch to imagine that it could in a decade or two though.

But it affects a possibility of getting a job or renting an apartment. I'm afraid there is a trend of trying to use the credit rating for more and more...

Well, the explicitly obscure social credit system “terrorism watch list” keeps you from flying with (almost) no recourse. I’m pretty sure it will be privatized. And it’s only a matter of time before your arrest record will affect your ability to attend a concert or sporting event — this is already the case in the UK.

And it's been the subject of much criticism, such as yours, although none have really stuck.

I wonder if the same can be said within China?

What do you mean "stuck"? That the news isn't writing articles about it daily?

It's opaque workings still concern civil libertarians tremendously. There's 50,000 on the list. That seems excesive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List#Controversy_and_cr...

It would be possible for restaurant and hotel booking sites to check your Yelp reviews and allow restaurants or hotels to bar reservations for people who leave bad reviews.

Those “share” buttons on web sites allow the big aggregators to connect accounts on various sites.

Yet.

> Among the complaints about the No Fly List is the use of credit reports in calculating the risk score. In response to the controversy, Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officials said in 2005 that they would not use credit scores to determine passengers' risk score and that they would comply with all rights guaranteed by the First and Fourth amendments to the United States Constitution.

It used to be a feature; they turned it off (reportedly). How hard would it be for them to silently re-enable it? How hard would it be to factor in facet Y which correlates with facet X (credit score)?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List#Controversy_and_...

"The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) dates all the way back to 1970 in its original form, and exists to protect consumer rights when it comes to “accuracy, fairness, and privacy” of credit information. According to the FCRA, as a consumer, you have the right to: Be told if information in your credit report has been used against you. Know what’s in your credit report. Access your credit score. Dispute incorrect or incomplete information. Have incorrect or incomplete information resolved by the credit bureaus. Have outdated, negative information withheld from your report. Limit who can access your file. Give consent to your report being given to employers. Limit pre-screened credit and insurance offers sent to you. Seek damages from violators. Be given additional protections if you’re the victim of identity theft or are on active military duty.

"States may have additional consumer reporting laws that extend beyond what the FCRA provides."

(https://www.lexingtonlaw.com/blog/credit-101/does-the-govern...)

False, Equifax does not have access to all of facebook chat records.

China has access to WeChat.

I was thinking of public FB, Twitter etc activity. But you raise an important point.

FB scans and processes all FB messenger traffic as does Twitter DMs (unlike, say, iMessage or, currently, SMS). They use the info for the usual customization, profiling, and ad sales. I don’t believe they sell the actual data itself but really there’s no reason why not, or why they couldn’t sell scoring info to the big guys.

And now I think of it, FB, Google, and Amazon could easily buy those bureaux (each could buy one) to supercharge the rating system in both directions. It would be like Google’s purchase of doubleclick.

FB also doesn’t have a prison system or armed forces.

The point is that the US uses the private sector to collect info that they are legally barred from collecting. Then they obtain that info from the private sector, via spying, classified request, or simple purchase.

So for example, private sector info is used by ICE to hunt down undocumented workers and imprison them. The end result is that armed agents put people in (private sector) prisons, no different from other countries in end result.

Putting your data on Google/FB/Twitter is still for the most part opt-in and not clearly linked to your real identity. Can't say that about a government enforced Social Credit System.

We don't know what Equifax has. Maybe there's no proof that they have access to Facebook and Gmail and the like, but they may well have it and there's no way to know they don't. These big companies have serious trust issues to overcome and they do comply with the law in countries which DO have social credit systems.

When you say “China” do you mean the Chinese government? It’s pretty clear the US has pervasive access to us company data, whether via techniques documented by Snowden or the massive rise in classified NSLs.

But in the US it is preferred that such systems be assembled in the private sector and not restricted in a way that government oversight would be.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com