by Kiala on 4/13/22, 12:49 PM with 192 comments
by jacquesm on 4/13/22, 12:56 PM
It's rotten to the core and to date there have been zero consequences for the perps and the damage continues to pile up. Our government has fallen over this and - surprise - the exact same players were re-elected without taking any responsibility for any of this.
by wallaBBB on 4/13/22, 1:15 PM
> Having dual nationality was marked as a big risk indicator, as was a low income.
>In 2020, Trouw and another Dutch news outlet, RTL Nieuws revealed that the tax authorities also kept secret blacklists of people for two decades, which tracked both credible and unsubstantiated “signals” of potential fraud. Citizens had no way of finding out why they were on the list or defending themselves.
>An audit showed that the tax authorities focused on people with “a non-Western appearance,” while having Turkish or Moroccan nationality was a particular focus. Being on the blacklist also led to a higher risk score in the child care benefits system.
by logifail on 4/13/22, 3:12 PM
Dual nationality indeed has its ups and downs. FWIW, our children have dual nationality, and on top of that, are all bilingual.
On enrolling them in their first school the school insisted on tweaking the enrollment data we'd submitted to list the locally-spoken language second, and so put the non-local language first, as "mother tongue" (and yes, that's exactly how it's described round here <sigh>). This meant the school would get extra money from the government from a pot of money intended to support migrant kids with language issues.
The first time this happened we pushed straight back and asked to get this corrected (all our kids were born locally and speak the local language and dialect like everyone else round here), but the school wasn't having it. They couldn't understand why we didn't want to support the school getting extra money.
What did we learn from this? If the incentives and/or system are broken by design, it can get very hard for anyone wanting to get the system corrected later.
by sidewndr46 on 4/13/22, 1:12 PM
How does this work? Wouldn't the government be fining the government and paying itself with the citizens tax revenues?
Also, this doesn't seem to serve as a warning at all. Unless all the politicians and civil servants were removed from their job, barred from public positions and given hefty fines then this is actually a clear sign encouraging more of this behavior from governments. Until there are clear consequences enacted by the populace, governments will continue this kind of behavior.
by tomputer on 4/13/22, 1:32 PM
It is a Dutch documentary, unfortunately without English subtitles:
https://www.2doc.nl/documentaires/series/2doc/2021/alleen-te...
by Tozen on 4/13/22, 3:37 PM
Those in charge, know exactly what they are doing when they create their "blacklists" and "targets". They know the names, they have the bias and prejudices, and they want to target those minority groups. The poorer and less able to fight back, the better. They know the type of damage they are doing to those peoples lives, and sadistically enjoy inflicting it.
It's only when they get caught, do they start running around and pulling out excuses from their orifices, and "it was the algorithm" is just one of them.
by nicgrev103 on 4/13/22, 1:28 PM
by fallingknife on 4/13/22, 1:16 PM
This is the real story here. The algorithm is incidental.
by rowanG077 on 4/13/22, 2:01 PM
by BlueTemplar on 4/13/22, 1:20 PM
Of course, this indirectly prohibits the use of the kind of programs that seem to have been used in this case, since instead of an algorithm, they use a neural network which is a black box even to his trainer (or architect).
Sadly, I hear that our own tax authorities have started to use them anyway, but then they have long had this tendency of consider themselves "special", and that laws didn't apply as much to them...
by gsliepen on 4/13/22, 2:51 PM
by einpoklum on 4/13/22, 3:05 PM
Suppose they had an algorithm for computing a risk score. Ok, so someone is determined to have a "high risk score". That doesn't mean that they've done anything wrong; at most, it means prioritizing them for closer scrutiny. That could still be discriminatory (e.g. focus on Turkish/Moroccan immigrants), but in itself - it's not supposed to lose anyone their benefits.
Also, the article says:
> Citizens had no way of ... defending themselves.
Why could they not sue the tax authorities in court, asking the court to order the tax authorities to withdraw their payment demands? If there was no evidence of them having evaded taxes, I mean.
by mint2 on 4/13/22, 2:53 PM
by kkfx on 4/13/22, 6:00 PM
A small example: automated procedures, if well designed tend to be really effective *in means* witch means they are good. BUT they tend to have hard to spot (or even evident, but no one care up front) loopholes and corner cases that makes not them but their use a nightmare. In those case the solution is simple: a human that pick all issues not automatically treated.
The *administrative* issue is this: those who choose automation must know it can fail and so must be prepared for a normal and regular and effective backup.
Personally if a day my country tax agency ask me 100k euros for a clear error I feel no specific scandal, anyone can makes error, but I expect to have a phone number to call where someone pick the call quickly and in little time we can sort out the issue. It's not a life-or-death thing, and it's complex, issues normally happen and that's is. If I can't call because no one answer or they answer but they are powerless or there is no quick solution than it's not the erroneous claim the scandal, but the absence of means to sort it out rapidly.
by matheusmoreira on 4/13/22, 5:15 PM
by a_bonobo on 4/14/22, 4:51 AM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robodebt_scheme
The Australian system was simpler than the Dutch system, comparing social benefits paid with averaged tax-income from the ATO. It was a stupidly wrong calculation, the averaged income is much higher in people with inconsistent income than it actually is, so people were hounded by debt collectors for nonexisting debt. A$1.2 billion false debt for a nation of 25 million people. A good number of associated suicides.
Of course, there was no real accountability, with the system having been introduced by the previous government who is now in opposition. Money has been paid back but everybody involved still has their job.
by ai_ja_nai on 4/13/22, 1:51 PM
This has nothing to do with algorithms, mates. It had to do with how it wasn't tested and monitored. It appears that it was just rolled out live.
> "Fraud prediction and predictive policing based on profiling should just be banned"
And here are the usual luddists pandering on the confused using wrong arguments. Sigh.
by goatcode on 4/13/22, 4:18 PM
by RcouF1uZ4gsC on 4/13/22, 1:27 PM
A student can get €100,000 for child care?
That is amazing.
For me, that is the most surprising thing in the entire article.
by turbo_bean on 4/13/22, 2:33 PM
This is news I'd expect to hear from a backwater country I'd never heard off. But I'm afraid it is just yet one data point of how wrong I was and how bad things have gone in the heart of EU and maybe the whole western world.
by jokoon on 4/13/22, 6:02 PM
Could be "not applying to enough job offers", while most employers are always complaining about candidates not being skilled enough, which is why unemployment is so high.
by puffoflogic on 4/14/22, 3:12 PM
by mahesh_rm on 4/13/22, 1:30 PM
by drno123 on 4/13/22, 3:31 PM
by kragen on 4/13/22, 4:43 PM
by smcl on 4/13/22, 1:18 PM
[0] - https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/nadine-dorries-micros...
by raxxorraxor on 4/13/22, 1:16 PM
Exactly, and especially in the public sector on the EU level this could be even vastly more damaging. The warning were loud enough and people didn't listen or care, so it is probably necessary that many will have to feel it before anything will change. This is probably too small scale, even if thousands are affected.
by liftm on 4/13/22, 1:17 PM
Bubblesort so dangerous. Not exactly the best headline, is it?
by chekibreki on 4/13/22, 1:23 PM
Maybe we should first do a correlation and causality analysis and see what it yields instead of closing our eyes because of PC?