But no, this time, it was about the welfare state doing its job, doing it mostly well, with details that were more impressive than I anticipated, and also opening its data to external analysts to continue improve it.
That was quite an emotional ride !
It also shows a bias towards single familly with low income, adding pressure to families already in state of precarity. It doesn't mean it's intentional but it is still an issue.
The fact that there are no proper audit of those algorithms before allowing those to be used looks quite bad in my opinion. This can be quite impactful on people's life.
Which bit is the one you're impressed with ? The part where you personally will be fine?
Please keep in mind that this algorithm doesn't actually punish anybody for wrongdoing, it's just a starting point for a human-led investigation.
Personally, I'd be more interested to know how a human-led investigation works. Is the process fair and reasonable? Do they go after poor people for minor problems with their following of the rules or do they go after them harshly? Is there a presumption of innocence and do they have an opportunity to appeal and have a fair shake in arguing their case?