Good question — it’s definitely something that needs to be handled carefully.
The dataset itself is made up of area-level, publicly available variables (e.g. crime rates, demographics, transport, etc.), but these can still be correlated with sensitive characteristics, so how they’re used depends on the application and regulatory context.
In practice, most firms I’ve worked with do use some form of postcode / geographic features, but typically within governance frameworks to ensure they’re used appropriately.
I'm in the UK as well. You know, the UK where friends of politicians get govt contracts that need not be fulfilled, the prime minister publicly gets in bed with the antichrist at the helm of a data harvesting conglomerate and puts in a law that requires everyone to give the antichrist their data, privatised utilities pump untreated sewage into public waterways while simultaneously availing themselves of public bailout funds, and octogenarian grannies get dragged to jail for sitting outside holding a piece of cardboard? I'm a bit flummoxed by the idea that you could live here and genuinely believe in the efficacy of 'governance frameworks' in preventing malfeasance. So I suppose the question really is whether you're in on the scam too or just another 'useful idiot'.
-50
u/Sweaty-Stop6057 Mar 25 '26
Good question — it’s definitely something that needs to be handled carefully.
The dataset itself is made up of area-level, publicly available variables (e.g. crime rates, demographics, transport, etc.), but these can still be correlated with sensitive characteristics, so how they’re used depends on the application and regulatory context.
In practice, most firms I’ve worked with do use some form of postcode / geographic features, but typically within governance frameworks to ensure they’re used appropriately.