Lessons from Peter Munk – Canadian Entrepreneur

Start A Company In An Emerging Industry You Are Familiar With (Some What)

(November 8, 1927 – March 28, 2018) Hungarian-Canadian Peter Munk moved to Canada 1941. He was of Jewish decent and Studied Engineering in the 1950s at UofT. There were no women in engineering in the 1950s….Peter Munk was interested a radio technology and his uncle was in that space. He was interested in radio tubes; with $3000 dollars he establish Clairtone: it was a Canadian success company. Largely, due to innovating in the cooling of the cathode tubes needed to project images on the TV. It was the BlackBerry (another Canadian startup) of the late 1950s – 1960s. Canada was mostly resources, so people didn’t believe that something that sold at $500 from Canada(?) could be sold at Bloomingdales.

Create Your Product in a Jurisdiction That Protects The Rare and Cool

The Canadian government was very interested in protecting industry and Clairtone became a natural darling of Canadian federal governments and consumers generally. The company scaled across the Canadian market. Most Canadians will remember the Clairtone product line. It was the first company to use transistors in the television.

It was a Canadian Watch this commercial from over 50 years ago. “Smart people won’t settle for something new.”

Do Not Get Sucked Into Relocating Via a Government:

The Clairtone company transitioned to Nova Scotia thanks to incredible government grants. Munk wanted to help Nova Scotia’s shipping industry. Premier Stanfield successfully attracted Peter Munk’s business into moving to New Glasgow in Nova Scotia. Why? Job creation + the Nova Scotia shipping industry skill set could be transferred to technology. However there were bond payment defaults, workers in Nova Scotia went on strike. As a result, the Government of Nova Scotia bought the TV company in 1970. Peter Munk walked away with a lot of capital.

Re-Invent Yourself Where Necessary (Too Much Knowledge is Bad)

Munk built a television set prototype with transistors rather than vacuum tubes in hi sbasement. Munk thought that too much knowledge can be dangerous: he was driven to be number one. He didn’t know transistors because he hadn’t taken that class yet. Peter Munk had to re-invent himself but reallocating his capital into hotels. Created South Pacific Hotel organization in Fiji etc. Munk sold that and then started in Natural Oil in 1979, he lost a lot of money and had a good board. So he pivoted to mining. Munk worked with Joseph Rotman and had a few lucky breaks. He founded Barrick Mining company. Barrick Gold is now the largest gold mining company. They bought CanFlo: they had diversified by they moved to coal, oil, therma all of that collapsed; the Bank wanted Munk to rescue the company and then merge CanFlo with Barrick. They had amazing management miners; outstanding in geotechnology, metallurgy.

Acquisitions: Bought Texaco mining; double the production, half the overhead. Bought GoldStrike, BlackMinerals. As the stock improved they exercised their magic and into all the mines. Mining is about evening out the cycle. Barrick Gold would use it’s shares to buy companies.

Why Does Canada Struggle at Business? And How Can We Get It Back?

Munk wonders out load: Why there are so few global leader companies from Canada. For example, a tiny country like Denmark has 6 major success stories: Phillips, Shell etc. Even BlackBerry, Nortel. Canadians are the best but we screw-up; Seagrams, the Wrightman brother owned Canary Wharf, Cadillac Fairview.

If I could provide an answer. 1) it’s easier to move to the US and test your idea in that market and then stay there, even if the standard of living etc is not as great as Canada’s. 2) tyranny of distance: doing business across a vast underpopulated country is costly, 3) government is selectively protectionist; helping certain companies who support the various political party leadership a) get re-elected, b) fundraise etc etc. The answer to getting it back is a billion dollar question.

Peter Munk: Give Back to Your Country

Peter Munk is extremely patriotic of Canada. The immigrants to Canad were given security, free healthcare, etc etc. He believe that where you come from matters, but it’s where you are going too. Money is a token to recognize success, do not hand that money over to your kids, it’s better giving them education, values, and tell them how to live a life. As a result Munk believes in redistributing the funds. Money should go back to the society: Canada in Peter Munk’s case.

A Successful and Happy Life

Money is a token of success. It is not the success itself. Money is a measure. George Soros who is also from Hungary broke the Bank of England and caused the pound to collapse. It led to John Major’s failed leadership. That is one way to make money by Munk believes these speculators are not the ones to aspire to. After you did get that money, it’s what you do with the Money. You need to look at the second side, you should not horde it. If you do the achievement part + the second part. You can’t do much better than that.

How Finance Is Used In Business Operations | Appreciating Depreciation!

Dollarama: Looking at their Industry leadership in Canada and Earnings Management 101

  1. competing on price
  2. cost leadership
  3. cheap product retailer

Dollarama IPOed in 2009 and become a Canadian darling trading as TSX:DOL. Then in June 2014 which is the first quarter of their 2015 financial year (fillings standard), they changed the useful life of all their stores & additional fixed assets from 10 years to 15 years. So what? Well, this spreads the rate of depreciation over a longer life time. Assets stay on the balance sheet longer and that means that Dollarama has a lower amount of depreciation expense per year. Since depreciation expense take away net income, the effect is that: in Dollarama’s case:

  • they gained $0.04 per share increase by in effect tweaking the depreciation rates of their stores.
  • David Milstead of the Globe and Mail said the reasoning behind this is that “Dollarama needed to keep the P/E at 21 versus 16.”

What Milstead is arguing is that Dollarama had to hit analyst expectations. Gross margin was down in the first quarter so how was that going happen?

You can imagine the C-suite discussion: “We wanted to maintain a premium valuation.” What’s a bit shocking is that adjustments on the depreciation rate of their stores made up for exactly the short-fall. Weird right? Although Dollarama could legitimately set depreciation for their stores at 15 years; it is plausible deniability. The kind of activity that draws similar behaviour in both corporate and political decision-making. Only through a premium valuation can Dollarama maintain its $21 Price over Earnings ratio. However in the long term, this C-suite decision would have a future impact on CAPEX. Cost leadership by gross margins were down and trending lower. They can’t increase prices; they have nothing to divest. They have few receivables (i.e. beyond gift cards). They could delay paying suppliers? Or they could only fiddle with depreciation. What’s the future impact on depreciation? The net income goes down in future years!

Depreciation as Form of Earnings Management

Recall that Depreciation is used to explain how much of an Asset’s value is used up. And then it is matched the expenses of an asset against the income that asset earns. Depreciation is used for income tax purposes to degrade assets thus reducing the tax burden on a business.

A straight-line depreciation would have a tangible asset worth $500K with a 5-year useful life. Every accounting year, the firm expenses $100K which is matched with the money that the tangible asset creates each year. Therefore, when you change the Depreciation from $500K over 5 years to 10 years, that means you would expense $50K per year rather than $100K which means the asset stays on the books for longer.

Depreciation sits on the balance sheet as a reduction from the total gross amount of a company’s long-term Property, Plant and Equipment PP&E. In other words, if you keep the PP&E longer on the balance sheet, it will benefit the earnings / net income. When an asset is retired or sold, the total amount of the accumulate depreciation associated with that asset is reversed, completely removing all record of the asset from a company’s books.

Depreciation expense is a non-cash expense because the monthly charge on a company’s income statement is made by a monthly recurring depreciation entry. A depreciation expense on a company’s income statement is debited and a company’s accumulate depreciation expense is credited on its balance sheet. If you reduce the depreciation expense over a specific period, it is the depreciation expense itself that reduces the earnings as a non-cash charge on a company’s income statement.

Off-Balance Sheet Assets: Leasing – Capital vs Operating

Operating lease is off the balance sheet only appearing in the Income Statement.

A true lease

Capital Leases: the lessor transfers ownership of the asset to the lessee who gets the depreciation for the asset. The lessee has to list the capital lease and gets the depreciation from that asset.

Operating Leases: are where the lessor owns the asset and all the costs and benefits (depreciation) associated with it. The lessee merely rents out the asset and pays a lease fee. The tangible asset is off the balance sheet.

Knife-edge criteria e.g. – under US GAAP, a lease is a capital lease if any one of these four hold:

  • Length of Lease extends to >= 75% of Useful Life
  • Ownership is transferred of title at end of the lease
  • Bargain Basement clause at the end of the lease
  • PV(Payments) @ “appropriate” discount rate >= 90% of Fair Value

Firms will often structure leases to ‘just’ avoid capital lease. i.e. Many Operating Leases be a Capital Lease in disguise.

Operating Lease:

Debit                    Rent Expense

Credit                   Cash

You have no application on the balance sheet:

Capital Lease:

Debit                    Asset

Credit                   Liability

Plausible deniability: you have a plausible justification that masks (convincingly!) another objective. Create your own schedule, flexibility, aim for the highest support, money. The true economic reality of a firm and what is presented in the financial statements: The role of financial statements in valuation does not rely solely on reported profit.

Operating Lease versus Capitalized Lease

Operating lease: the transaction appears on the Income Statement. >= 75% of it’s useful life. Ratios are better: Return on Assets (sales are not in Operating Lease). Fewer journal entries. ROA is Return on Assets = Net Income / Average Total Assets. Capitalized Lease is BS + IS

  • Debit Rent Expense
  • Capitalized Lease; the transaction appears on the Balance Sheet and Income Statement.
  • Debit into Expenses
  • Debit Liability
  • Credit Cash

Who is Fooled?

Banks can observe this activity as well. They are not fooled.

Off Balance Sheet Finance

Debit Covenant: when a company is given a target performance range by investors that they must follow.

Ebit/Int

Off Balance Sheet Finance

But

Ebit/Int+Rent

Moody’s Agencies: {Not Fooled Either} Air Canada – standard metrics + Moody’s standard adjustments. 8.3 billion adjust to long term debt. Balance Sheet: -> present value of Capital Lease

Air Canada Case

You need to get the present value of capital leases. Air Canada added Cap Leases. Investors trade on heuristics: so yes, Investors can be FOOLED. Take Operating Lease for the next 5 years. Cost of Debt 7.32% You can almost double the debt load. If you capitalize your Operating Leases the firm looks totally screwed. Take all the debt to the end of 2004

Intangible Asset (Off the Balance Sheet)

  • Intangible assets include intellectual property, brand equity and goodwill.
  • Intangible assets are categorized into two categories;

1) those that appear on the financial statement and;

2) those that do not appear on the financial statement.

R&D Expenses are almost always expensed. There are some expections; software firms where accounting standard allow for the capitalization of development expenses after product feasibility has been demonstrated. This rule applies for internally generated intangibles.

If the pharmaceutical firm develops a patent, that patent is not recognized on the balance sheet.

If the pharmaceutical firm purchases patents form other: the value of the patent appears on the balance sheet. It is difficult to determine the value of intangibles. Spending money on R&D or advertising does not guarantee a benefit to the firm. However, when assets are acquired there is an explicit or implicit valuation for the acquired intangible asset.

Is R&D an Asset?

In the US all R&D is expensed. On the balance sheet; there is a liability. There matching entry is on the shareholders’ equity and deferred taxes.

What about Advertising: Energizer Bunny didn’t improve Duracell’s sale

Goodwill              |                            <- Intangible

|

Net Assets           |

|

Valeant Case R&D is expensed in the US but R&D is Goodwill and Intangibles.

 

What are the future benefits of its assets?

Goodwill: I can’t sell that much.

Intangible assets are massive: you can put the intangibles in the Goodwill and not in Net Assets. ROA (return on assets) was low 1.2% organically

The telltale signs of distortion on in the ROE, firms with intangible industries will have ROEs much higher than firms in other industries and also much higher than their costs of equity.

ROE =                   Net Income / Total Shareholder’s Equity

 

ROA =                   Net Income / Total Assets

You have R&D of $10 billion as Intel. But your balance sheet shows under $5 billion of identifiable intangible assets. Intel R&D using a three year straight line amortization period; what this means is that you don’t expense R&D as incurred but capitalize it and amortize it over a three year period.

Intel is close to steady state which means the impact is more muted.

You only grow Goodwill by acquisition.

  • 13 Billion Down
  • 2 Billion
  • ROA 8.4%

ROA inflates if the most important assets isn’t in the denominator. You are growing by acquisition. Synergies: not tangible, you can’t give to another firm. 11 Billion out 13 billion means you have negative equity.

On Balance Sheet – Intangible Assets

Why On Balance Sheet distorted?

In this case, the intangible assets are overstated on the balance sheet.

Two types of intangible assets:

  • Amortization period not appropriate (for finite lived intangibles): these are patents which expire after a set duration. Finite lived intangible assets are amortized over their useful life.
  • Impairment not taken (indefinite life intangibles): these are goodwill or trademarks. Indefinite duration assets are typically evaluated periodically for impairment.

Where Crucial

In addition to I.P. intensive industries, also M&A intensive firms/industries. HP and CGI for example.

Telltale Signs
Others taking impairments, especially for goodwill while this firm is not taking impairments.

Firms hate to take goodwill impairments as these are a tacit admission that the acquisition was a failure: goodwill will reflect overpayment.

Remember that Goodwill impairments are not tax deductible while fixed asset impairments are! Therefore with Goodwill impairments, the impact will be felt in Net Income and Correspondlu in Shareholder’s equity.

Hewlett Packard | Autonomy

The HP acquisition of Autonomy: ‘Get Rid of Goodwill?

You need to do an Impairment Test (for your information) there are 4 steps.

PV = FCF/(r-g)

The g will massively impact your PV, so in terms of financials you can massively miscalculated the PV.

Valeant doesn’t tell you about the inputs into the Goodwill impairment and we get wildly different results. HP had a 9 billion 2012 impacted due to the Autonomy situation.

Autonomy $9 billion, they paid a premium of 65% over the target’s trading price. HP recorded a $6.9 billion goodwill and $4.3 billion of other intangible assets. HP overpaid and they had to write down $8.8 billion. $5.7 billion was written off goodwill, while $3.1 billion was written off the intangible assets.

On the Income Statement you see charges for both these impairments; The balance sheet, impairments of $8.8 billion totally towards goodwill and other intangibles and an entire impact of $8.8 billion on equity as these impairments are non-deductible.

  1. flexibility of write downs

+

  1. Poor profitability

Therefore, it’s possible that there was a Big Bath: Autonomy founder suggests as much: it’s a write off quickly. Write off over 10 years versus write it all down now.

They choose to write it down NOW, indicating a Big Bath.

HP’s Big Bath

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_Autonomy

Liability Distortions

RRSP and 401K are Defined Contribution Plans:

Remember: Conservative Accounting Versus Aggressive Accounting

  • Being conservative is Asset DOWN Income DOWN
  • Being aggressive Assets UP and Income UP

Deferred Revenue

Why do deferred revenues get distorted? Deferred revenues can get distorted when firms manipulate the criteria for revenue recognition. If a firm is aggressive, it may choose to recognize revenue prematurely, increasing revenue and thereby income, and lowering the deferred revenue liability.

Where it matters?

Deferred revenues are important in businesses where the operating cycles are long; where project often span multiple years and where there is a mismatch between the receipts of payments from customers and provision of goods/services.

Example, Microstrategy was accused of aggressive revenue recognition. Essentially, had multi-period contracts for software service Instead of deferring the revenue and recognixing it over the life of the contract. For the year 1999, Microstrategy admitted to overstating approxiametaly $50 million in revenue.

Deferred Revenue

  • Instead they should treat it as deferred revenue
  • When firms get paid, before they provide a good/service, they should not treat it as revenue.
  • In the future year, they recognize revenue (cr.) and remove the deferred revenue (dr.)
  • Often firms are aggressive and prematurely recognize revenue
  • Adjustments are similar to channel stuffing with an increase in liability (deferred revenue) instead of decrease in an asset (accounts receivable).
  • Micro-strategy example – prematurely recognized 50 million of revenue (and 2 million of associated cost)

Reserves

When you recognize the impact of the expenditures before the expenditures actually occur.

  • Warranty Expenses Debt $5 million
  • Warranty Reserves Credit $5 million

Reserves can be distorted at both times either at origination or at the time when then the expense is incurred. You can have expenses diverted to reserves instead of the income statement.

Where Might This Be Crucial?

In industries where warranties are crucial. Restructuring reserves are crucial as often the ‘turnaround that has been shown by the new management can be a fiction of the accounting treatments.

Telltale Signs:

Unexpected improvement in cost ratios on the income statement, along with a corresponding decline in reservices.

Pensions

Defined Contribution Plans:

  • You have Assets and Liabilities which are equal to each other.
  • These plans tie you to a given company for example:
  • GM: $50 BILLION liability because they had a contribution plan.
  • Car company: $2500 per car went to cover Post Retirement Healthcare costs.
  • The risk is with the employee.
  • Contribution Plans are portable?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defined_contribution_plan

Defined Benefit Plans:

  • Risk is to the employer.
  • The present value of the future payments to be made to the pension plan is the PBO (projected benefit obligation). If the Net Assets of a pension exceed the PBO, the pension plan is adequately funded.
  • If the Net Asses are lower than the PBO, then the pension is underfunded.
  • This is a portable plan which you can take with you anywhere you like.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individual_Pension_Plan

Pension Plan sits under the COGS, SG&A or some other expense category. Pension Expense has three components: a) service cost, b) interest cost and c) return on plan.

Distortion in Pension Accounting:

Some because of the complexity of the standard and some because of the manipulation.

Where might this be crucial? Pension related issues are important in labour intensive and unionized industries, usually more so in older legacy companies.

How old are my fixed assets: accumulated breakdown: Apple outsources to Foxconn. Apple has Operating leases for their Apple Stores.

Discontinued Operation

When firms discontinue a line of business, the results are then restated for past periods: usuall past 3 income statements and last 2 balance sheets….

They want to prevent firms from disposing of entire lines of businesses in order to improve net income. Amy gains and losses will be reported separately. The Net Assets from discontinued operations: this represents the assets less liabilities of the discontinue operations.

Changed in Accounting Principles

You could change accounting principles regularly in order to confuse Equity Researchers.

Cumulative Effect of Accounting with Pro-Forma Disclosure

  • Say a company changes from one method of depreciation to another.

Governments love depreciating assets;

  • New assets get depreciated well before new investment.
  • Citizens hate to see reinvestment in older infrastructure.
  • The government only wants to invest in older infrastructure when it really really needs to be fixed.
  • They have to issue debt or raise taxes to get more revenue.

Grss PP&E                                                        Acc Dep

_______________                          _____________________

11billion                                                                           Credit 4billion

10.7bilion                                                                        Credit .700billion

 

Net PP&E

7 |

BA versus Luftansa:

  • BA’s long-haul planes depreciate at a lower rate because they have fewer take offs and landings.
  • Luft has less turnaround times, smaller planes therefore higher rates of depreciation.

British Airways

Gross PP&E                                      Depreciation                                     Assets

Layer useful left                              high

18 to 25 years for their assets

Lufthansa

  • When you balance those two together you get
  • 12 years for their assets.

Lufthansa has smaller planed, depreciation is much fast, more takes and landings. Gross PP&E/Useful Life = Depreciation Expense. 12 years depreciation with a 15% salvage value.

Average Gross PP&E

  • Useful Life

BA          .60                        .61

Luft        .63                        .64

 

Gross PP&E                                       Acc Dept

Dr.          |                                                          | Cr.

$23.2B    |                                                          |$12.6B

Net PP&E

Dr.          |

19.6B      |

So if you were to use the same depreciation. Equity increases when you depreciate faster…

How Mainstream Publications Overlook Their Own Weirdness and Just Blame Facebook…

[Disclaimer this is a non-partisan publication]
And I am no Facebook apologist, but I thought it was worth raising awareness about the following:

[Transcript] Hey, I had to talk about this because I noticed, this morning, something really interesting, and I mean, more interesting than your standard cat video while you’re scrolling through Instagram. I was on Twitter and I clicked on a link to a really cool story called “Watch a Robot ‘Hen,’ Robot Chicken, with some chicks, flock of chicks.” And when you scroll to the bottom of this article, you’ll notice some moderately spooky or weird links from Outbrain and I think we need to look at Outbrain, but let me just show you on my phone what it looks like.

So, on my phone, I don’t know if you can see here, but the link at the bottom… Where’s my… Yeah, there’s my finger. The link at the bottom, one of them says, “Justin Trudeau about to legalize something controversial.” You click on that link, it takes you to this web page, which I will provide a link to in the video. You can see it right now probably. So I’m just voicing over what I see. Now, isn’t it kind of interesting this content is basically false or low-quality news? It’s not from the CNN website. If you look at the top URL, it’s not from CNN. It’s from something called insiderentertainment.com, and Outbrain is promoting it. At the bottom of the page, you can see what it’s really about. It’s about bingo. Fair play. I know that Wired is a reputable publisher and I know that Outbrain is really reputable as well, and so they post this in order to draw traffic to commercial interest.

Now, imagine if this was actually not true (which it obviously is not true): Justin Trudeau has legalized gambling to cover costs. It’s, basically an attack on the current liberal government in Canada. So this is Outbrain directly on Wired magazine, a reputable technology publication, which has probably seen hard times. Why are they seeing hard times? Facebook is eroding their revenue. YouTube is eroding their revenue. PewDiePie is getting 2 million hits per video and “The Washington Post” is only getting 1 million hits. This isn’t fair. So, what do we need to do? We should be attacking Facebook as publications. We should be criticizing them in particular and there’s some legitimate arguments. There are very legitimate arguments regarding Facebook, but what’s being overlooked is this hilarious Outbrain and Taboola redirection network.

So what they do is, as you can see at the bottom of the article, there are sponsored stories from third parties. You click on it and it’s about driving traffic from Wired, as reputable site, to, you know, whatever you wanna sell these folks on the internet. Now, why would Wired work with them? Because ad revenue, they need the money. They’re desperate actually in many cases because people don’t wanna pay for what they feel is free even though 10 years ago, 20 years ago you’d have to buy Wired Magazine to read these great articles. So you’ve got Outbrain, they are reputable, they look at the content, they tie the articles to that content and boom, it’s great.

They have to vet their publishers, but it’s a chicken in the end. They need the publishers and at the same time, they need the suppliers, the actual companies that will publish articles to drive traffic. And it’s this weird situation where they might not necessarily vet and approve of every story and say, “Oh, valid. This is a legitimate story.” They’re happy to take the money and run, and Wired magazine is complicit in this. Now, another company that is even more famous for ingenuity for sure, for having that ability to create a click worthy the article is Taboola, and they’re based in Europe, Israel, in the US and they publish articles on places like “Huffington Post.”

So, when you scroll down to what appears to be, you know, a reputable website, “HuffPost,” sure, you read this article about Cambridge Classica or Analytica, whatever it’s called, and then you scroll at the bottom and you have “You May Like” a bunch of ads for things that are like. Some of them are pretty dubious. You click on “Forget Lithoium. We’re advocating You Buy Electric Cars.” Fine, I suppose. It’s not pretending to be CNN, the website, but it’s interesting what’s going on here. So the media isn’t actually going after these two publications and the other publishers that redirect people from these websites to often questionable, sometimes questionable, not all I’d say, you know. Let’s just pretend it’s 20% ballpark, a number I made up, but it’s clearly some of these publishers are dubious and are not legitimate. But let’s look at “Wired Magazine’s” business model, let’s look at “Huffpost” business model and analyze what’s really going on here.

These companies are under duress, you know. What, with me, you could say, but they’re going after Facebook and no publisher, mainstream publisher, will go after what’s directly on their own web pages, again, because that’s how they make money. And this speaks to the broader problem of what I call $ad Revenue. So that’s ad revenue that is clickbait driven, that is about intensity of the viewership, about entertainment over factual information, the goal of which is to drive traffic to their sites, CNN or Wired or whoever other…Fox News, whatever.

They’re all in the game of eyeball collection and then redistributing those eyeballs or selling those people off to various business commercial interests, which is fair play. But they’re not auditing the quality and the veracity of the claims on these click-worthy, little, crazy articles on the bottom because they need the money. And these content redistributors don’t have the time to vet everything themselves, so we all point at Facebook. Facebook this and that because Facebook’s a multi-billion dollar company. It should be able to solve this, but we don’t look at the Taboola and Outbrain. So, I guess, even the reputable publishers are saying things like, “Donald Trump is about to cause World War III. Click on this link. Find out more about his evil and crazy actions, and while you’re at it, look at the bottom. Take a look at this weird article and try some bingo.” So thank you very much. I thought that’d be kind of a cool thing to share.

Weapons of Math Destruction an Important Insight

Math is Logic, Math is Beautify, Math is Abuse-able:

Math is logic and it should be ported to social discussions. O’Neil worked with Larry Summers and O’Neil says that the trick of the economic downturn in 2008 was that everyone trusted the math nerds who were actually lying and engaging in mathematical abuse. But there is more to this story….

Data Science determines who are the Winners and Losers:

The algorithms are opinions embedded in code. It takes past data and builds a predictive model of what your goal as a company is in the future. You impose your algorithmic goals, we train our algorithms for success. There is no objective algorithm. We were marketing these things as if it is being mathematical but they are corrupted as well. Three areas of concern for Kathy O’Neil are:

  • Widespread: where the less well off get a loan, scoring systems are not appropriate for real people.
  • Mysterious: these algorithms are like secret laws that are not held accountable for anything.
  • Destructive: they ruin people’s lives, opportunities are getting taken away from people; there is a negative feedback loop; just thinking about university grades as a feedback loop itself.

Teach Assessment Problem:

Standardized test performance in order weed out bad teachers has failed according to O’Neil. If you have a test system the statistical scores it is hard to know how the kids did well. The error sample of their students (the hot and cold room) is significant. O’Neil said she was not allowed to understand how these people were evaluated. They shamed the teachers, but they couldn’t get the testing model. It wasn’t meaningful analysis. Teachers were punished for the previous year’s students if the teacher’s from the previous year were cheating on the tests for those kids: in essence passing the problem forward. I remember teaching swimming to a kid that had extreme ADHD, I failed her and their parents wanted the kid to progress to the next level  anyway so they tried to pressure me; their argument was that they had spent the money….I didn’t pass that kid up the chain. But if my job was at stake, I might have….

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Personality Tests for Jobs:

They do systematically discriminate for jobs using an algorithm. Algorithm’s basically codify the past practices, therefore, they basically want more males in power. So one kid’s dad was suing 7 companies for creating personality tests that filter out mentally challenged people. Human resources is also a huge problem, these folks think they are filtering appropriately but they are biased towards certain attributes.

Algorithms are Value Laden Decision Making Processes: Predicting health outcomes: doctors having it is great, but insurance companies and companies discriminate against people who have high health risks. 

Solutions:

  1. Hippocratic Oath for Data Scientists.
  2. Mathematical Models need to be Improved because We are Hiding Behind Data to Perpetuate Past Patterns of behaviour.
  3. Anonymity doesn’t help this problem because you can categorize people using other markers to determine their race extra.
  4. Learn more….

 

This publication is dedicated to finance, politics and history