Excellent post on a highly sensitive issue.

I would like to use an anology to highlight the intrinsic advantage analytics have over humans.

Yahoo used to be the leading Search Engine. Yahoo employed people to decide which websites should get the highest ranking. In contrast, from day one Google used the “Algorithm”. Yahoo’s approach was never sustainable, given the exponential growth in the number of websites.

I have worked on the development of Anti Money Laundering (AML) systems. AML systems perform Financial Transaction Monitoring. They could not function without analytics. They monitor Transaction Activity on millions of accounts. The purpose of the analytics is to identify “Transaction Activity that is unusual when compared to an account holder’s peers”. The AML system alerts a human to study the unusual activity. The human then seeks to “explain away” the unusual activity as ‘normal’, e.g. Once off sale of an asset. If the human cannot find a good reason for the unusual transaction activity, they report it to the authorities as “Suspicious”.

In my opinion, AML systems provide a good example of the pragmatic combining of analytics and humans - for the good of society.

I completely agree with your quote “analytics are ethically neutral and the risk of something going “to the dark side” is the risk that comes from the people involved, with or without analytics.”

Rgds Ken