Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I Got Access to My Secret Consumer Score

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 341 posts

Re: I Got Access to My Secret Consumer Score

#101

Post by otikik »

zzzeek wrote: post #60
Simulacra wrote: post #56

Two points: First, the very act of requesting your data is in a way confirming and verifying the accuracy of the data. Second: Every prescription you've ever filled with insurance - and even some without - is recorded by companies like Milliman.[0] When you want to buy life insurance, health insurance, etc. they can request to see what medications you're on, have been on, etc. [0]. https://clark.com/insurance/how-to-…

how does that not violate HIPAA ? I see it talking about "you can proactively opt out with hipaa" but everything I've ever seen about HIPAA is that all "opting in" needs to be explicitly granted by the patient.

I imagine somewhere in their quoting algorithm they have a conditional like `if potential_customer.opted_out_of_hipaa then quote = max_possible_quote, msg = 'you can lower your quote by sharing your data with us'".

Re: I Got Access to My Secret Consumer Score

#102

Post by stedaniels »

awinder wrote: post #94
maxerickson wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously. If companies are relying on the fraud estimates, it isn't going to be fun to be a false positive.

I mean people have been subjected to fraud scoring for decades, you get declined, you follow up, and you get in w/ a new data point for the next time.

Not when these new automated systems don't allow for a follow-up because it would be too expensive to code or hire a human to do it.

Re: I Got Access to My Secret Consumer Score

#104

Post by dexterdog »

jacquesm wrote: post #48

GDPR like legislation would have required any company holding a profile on you to disclose that fact, would have allowed you to read it; would have been required to correct it on request and would have allowed you to ask for removal of your data. Scoring companies such as these will lobby like there is no tomorrow against such legislation.

Not all. I work for a company that deals with all kind of data like this (but not actual communications). We are building a system to honor all opt-outs and deletions and will be online before the first of the year for CCPA. The reality is that most people will not ask for this stuff because they don't care. Requests for actual data are tricky because you have to fully validate that the person is who they say they are.

Re: I Got Access to My Secret Consumer Score

#105

Post by dexterdog »

kofejnik wrote: post #27

Thank God for GDPR Also, I imagine any and all of this can and will be subpoenaed in any litigation, such as divorce or debt collection US needs its own GDPR, stat

We have CCPA (well we will shortly) and most companies that employ any kind of lawyers will comply with it.

Re: I Got Access to My Secret Consumer Score

#106

Post by xeRTRex »

Simulacra wrote: post #56

Two points: First, the very act of requesting your data is in a way confirming and verifying the accuracy of the data. Second: Every prescription you've ever filled with insurance - and even some without - is recorded by companies like Milliman.[0] When you want to buy life insurance, health insurance, etc. they can request to see what medications you're on, have been on, etc. [0]. https://clark.com/insurance/how-to-…

And the history of every life insurance application an individual filled is collected and shared through a company called MiB[0] to help mitigate fraud.

[0]. mib.com

Re: I Got Access to My Secret Consumer Score

#108

Post by nojvek »

Frost1x wrote: post #96
Cieplak wrote: post #26

I’m curious what sort of due diligence these companies must do to authenticate you as a person prior to satisfying an information retrieval request. Given that the exchange is entirely digital, it seems plausible that there are bad actors who would pose as someone else to gain access to their personal information. What sort of liability does one of these data controllers bear when they fail to properly authenticate a…

I suspect we as a society need new legislation to deal with these sort of issues. Before, much of this was incredibly difficult to impossible so legislation and regulation was entirely avoidable and relatively rare occurence could be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. At this point, technology has enabled this sort of behavior at mass scale, now revealing far more personal and useful information about individuals. A…

Looking out how the spam act played out, which allows implicit opt in compared to Europe’s explicit opt-in.

I believe US govt will always be at the mercy of corporations.

Now some things are great. Like CCPA, California’s version of GDPR. But getting it accepted throughout the US is a mammoth task.

I have hope though.

Re: I Got Access to My Secret Consumer Score

#109

Post by uptown »

kombucha11 wrote: post #93
uptown wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the Sift Google Form: "In order to process your rights request, Sift’s Privacy Team needs to collect the below information about you. We are unable to process your request without complete submission of this form and a copy of your valid government ID for verification purposes."

They havent provided me the Google form for Sift. I'll still submit it to them though. I've once been a Coinbase customer so they likely have it already.

It's linked-to in the NYTimes article: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeGTJHX9edmQOD8Ez-1...

Re: I Got Access to My Secret Consumer Score

#110

Post by ineedasername »

CPLX wrote: post #97
ineedasername wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's absolutely a difference between a binary "fraud/not fraud" flag and a continuous variable for quality of customer. They measure different things and have very different use cases.

Is there a perceptible difference to a consumer who has been flagged as "fraud" when they are not, in fact, someone who has committed fraud? If not, then there's no difference.

They are literally two very different types of data. This isn't an ambiguous issue: One is a continuous variable, the other categorical. Whether or not one or the other could erroneously flag someone doesn't change that, and doesn't mean they're the same. Because the nature of those differences means the use cases are different. A continuous score has much wider versatility than a black & white binary value, and allows for more nuanced use. Even if it's just in the realm of fraud detection, a continuous score allows for more safeguards, e.g., if it's low but not too low then it triggers further review rather than outright rejection.
Post reply on HN