There are currently no detailed authoritative statistics on how many debtors there are in China, how many defaulters are overdue, and what kind of structure they have.

Including the data given by the central bank and various official versions, they are all conservative and have a certain lag. Moreover, some data are controversial.

For example, the number of dishonest people is 6.9 million, but in fact the number of dishonest people is definitely more than this. Because many people did not go to court and were not reported.

How many debtors are there? Central bank statistics are insufficient. According to the ratio of credit information and mutual payment, there are currently 700 million people, which means the number of people with credit information records, including people with credit cards, mortgage loans, car loans, consumer loans, cash loans, etc.

About 75% of them, or 500 million people, have overdue records, including the possibility of repayment being several days late. This counts too.

About 7% of people, that is, people with 5kw, have serious overdue records. The saying in the traditional loan industry is "three in a row and six in a row". 3-6 refers to overdue for three consecutive months in the past two years, with a total of more than six overdues. This kind of contingency often affects a person's short-term mortgage and car loans.

Those that are seriously overdue include more than 3kW, that is, those that are overdue for more than 6 months.

Some of these overdue cases will be reported to the court and become persons subject to execution for breach of trust. According to the above official statistics, it is 690w.

These people will not only be blacklisted from loan rejections, but will also be restricted from taking flights and buses, etc.

It is no exaggeration to say that there are hundreds of millions of blacklists involved in all walks of life.

To only talk about the phenomenon without talking about the problems and solutions is to be a hooligan. In credit business, the blacklist used is easy to accumulate, which can easily lead to its failure.

We need to remove low-risk groups, just like the defaulters will be withdrawn after the contract is fulfilled.

I remember almost two years ago, the issue of clearing the blacklist was discussed during a department meeting, and then the boss asked everyone why they wanted to clear the blacklist instead of intercepting. It's said that the blacklist is getting bigger and bigger. Do you want to release the good guys inside, or do you want to get rid of the bad guys and then release everyone else?

There is a story when I think about it. After all, I talk too much. Then I wait for the cue. Unfortunately, a few people hinted at me and I was too lazy to speak.

I suddenly remembered it today, so I will say it again. Basically, those were my thoughts at the time, and they have always bothered me. Why do I never have new ideas?

As we all know, risk control is to stop high-risk people or behaviors and let low-risk people or behaviors pass.

So how to determine high-risk groups and behaviors? Use data.

What I want to talk about here is a kind of data, a blacklist.

Everyone who has done risk control knows that we will use blacklists in actual work. This blacklist database can be external data or data accumulated by internal business. It is actually a collection of various risk lists.

This list is very useful because it is known bad users. Just say no directly, and there is no need to spend seven or eight hours doing this or that.

But there is a problem with this list. It is often made inaccessible. Because it is easy to enter the darkness, but difficult to get out of the darkness. When did you think of venting?

This will lead to more and more people on the list. This is obviously unreasonable.

On the one hand, gang involvement is time-sensitive. For example, a person who is currently overdue may not always be overdue; on the other hand, joining the blacklist is also a mistake. These people are used to kill users and then further hack more users.

So the blacklist should be an admission and exit system, which can be automatic or manual.

The logic of the hacker attack determines the length of the limit.

Just like rejected users can be blacklisted, but this is to prevent users from repeatedly querying data when they apply again, incurring data costs. This validity period may be one month, which is more appropriate, but a longer period is unreasonable. Because the user's status has changed, re-evaluation may yield different results.

User internal risks are easy to assess, so they are easy to be hacked. The information of these people can also be tracked in time.

This blocking rule is suitable for automatically setting blocking logic.

What about external blacklist data? Not for you. It doesn't matter if there is a fee or not. The most important thing is that you make sure it's accurate.

With the development of big data in recent years, too many third-party data platforms have emerged, and almost every one of them has blacklist output, such as text messages, payments, court security, equipment, mutual payments, etc. These are abundant.

In other words, what is the risk to the person being hit? Obviously, higher is better. In fact, it is reasonable to have a market risk of 3 times or 5 times. What about coverage? Not too high. 3% and 5% may be more appropriate. If it reaches more than 10% and can achieve this level of high accuracy, it would be too exaggerated. Then the reliability of this data is questionable.

So, I am afraid that you will not be able to stop, but I am also afraid that you will stop too much.

Inevitably, even with a reasonable automatic blocking mechanism, it is easy to block more and more blacklists.

What then? Maybe we have to find a way to crack it manually.

That is, some low-risk users retire. But these users are all dropped directly, and there is no risk performance.

Manual removal is quite difficult.

Do it even if you have difficulties. How to do it?

This is the question mentioned at the beginning. Do you want to let the good guys out, or do you want to get rid of the bad guys and then let everyone else out?

This is essentially a question of risk preference.

If we think that the sample as a whole, that is, all the blacklists to be processed, are worse than normal users, then it is safer to get good people from them; on the contrary, if we think that the sample is similar to normal users, we should eliminate the bad people form, trust our model because that’s what the model does.

Risk assessment and confidence exist simultaneously. We use this model for risk scoring. There are a group of good people with high confidence among users with good ratings, and there are a group of bad people with high confidence among users with poor ratings. Most of the rest are intermediate.

Because the blacklist is poor, removing intermediate users is too risky. For the sake of safety, we should catch good people.

This is equivalent to acquiescing that these people have problems and finding those people who you can prove are good people.

This is a guilty assumption.

First is a jury trial

A person is presumed innocent, then evidence is gathered to prove his guilt, and if there is sufficient evidence to prove his guilt, the presumption of innocence is rejected.

When we remove people from the risk control blacklist, we are actually using the hypothesis of guilt.

How to do it specifically?

We need a model to screen good people with high confidence. In fact, unsupervised methods are not suitable because they are looking for extreme bad people. We need to define appropriate labels. First, among these blacklisted users, there should still be a low proportion of users with risky behaviors, and blacklisting in loans will produce this result. Second, graph network technology is suitable here. Because credit risk can be spread, we try to give this label to some blacklisted users.

Obviously, such a removal can only remove a smaller proportion of users. If you expect the size of the blacklist to be halved, then start with the effectiveness of blacklisting.

Because of the difficulty of clearing out, as a user, try not to get into trouble.

You may say that this buffet restaurant won’t let you in, so you can go to another restaurant.

What if these buffet restaurants use a blacklist?

The blacklist is easy to transmit, and at the same time it is difficult to be removed. It is easy to enter the blacklist and difficult to get out. Behind this matter is that the negative impact of one bad user requires many, many good users to make up for it, and it can even be devastating.

Even when an account like mine writes articles like this, there are inevitably people to avoid.

I would like to emphasize the rationality of this approach. Otherwise you may find many things difficult to understand.

In fact, it is all about risk control.

Everyone knows that no matter how high-risk areas are, only a few people have experienced clustered risks. The vast majority of direct leaders are normal people, and there are only a handful of people who have insulted teachers' ethics. However, because These effects are large enough, and it is reasonable to say "it is better to kill one by mistake than to let go of a thousand".

When you have a choice, the elimination method should be stricter. Don't think about releasing them from the blacklist in the hope that subsequent risk control can solve it.

The most important thought of seeking perfection in "The Art of War" is never to defeat the enemy, but to preserve and strengthen oneself.

The importance of risk control cannot be overemphasized, because if you don’t win the battle, you can fight again. If you lose your life, you have nothing.

Don’t underestimate your enemies.

The logic of blacklist removal can be summed up in these six words.

The question image comes from Unsplash, based on the CC0 protocol. Related questions and answers: Related questions and answers: My father has been on the credit blacklist, will it affect my civil service examination?

Hello, we need to distinguish two concepts clearly: first, the credit blacklist is not the same as the person subject to execution for dishonesty (Lao Lai); second, being a Lao Lai does not mean that one is a Lao Lai. rely. At present, laws and regulations only clarify that persons subject to execution for breach of trust shall not be employed as civil servants themselves.

However, do you think the children of persons subject to breach of trust are suitable to be civil servants?

First of all, let’s introduce the difference between the credit blacklist and the dishonest persons subject to enforcement. These are two completely different concepts.

The People's Bank of China is mainly responsible for the credit reporting business, which records a person's credit record, including whether he has repaid his loan on time, whether he has repaid his credit card on time, whether he has paid telecommunications fees (such as mobile phone bills) on time, etc. .

The so-called credit blacklist is actually just a common name. It refers to a person whose credit is too poor and has repeatedly failed to repay credit cards or overdue loans, etc., which affects personal credit. The specific impact is mainly on being unable to apply for mortgages, car loans and other loans, or being unable to get approved for new credit cards, or reducing the limits of old credit cards, etc.

The defaulter is determined by the court and refers to a person who has the ability to perform but refuses to perform or resists execution or evades the obligation to execute an effective legal document.

To put it simply, it is someone who the court considers to be "a person who has money but does not pay it back", commonly known as "Lao Lai".

After being included in the list of dishonest persons subject to execution by the court, they will be subject to credit punishment in accordance with the law, including:

1. The information of the dishonest persons subject to execution shall be announced to the public, including names, Photos, contact numbers, etc.

2. Notify the credit bureau and record it in the credit system, affecting personal credit. In other words, the person subject to execution for dishonesty must be on the credit blacklist, but the person on the blacklist may not be the person subject to execution for dishonesty. The person must be sued to the court and determined by the court.

3. Restrict high consumption, such as not taking flights or star-rated hotels, and children are not allowed to attend high-fee private schools!

4. Affect bidding, market access (such as starting a company), etc.

5. Persons subject to execution for breach of trust shall not be employed as civil servants, career staff, or join the army!

Therefore, in order to determine whether it will have an impact on candidates applying for civil servants, we must first determine whether it is a "credit blacklist" or a "person subject to execution for dishonesty"!

Secondly, let’s introduce the impact of the credit blacklist on applicants for civil service examinations.

In fact, the credit blacklist affects personal credit. There are no laws or regulations that restrict people on the credit blacklist from applying for civil servants.

In other words, even if your credit score is very poor, it will not affect your application for civil service, let alone your father.

So, if it is just a simple credit blacklist, it will not affect your application for the civil service.

Then, let’s introduce the impact of dishonesty on those applying for civil service examinations.

At present, the "Civil Service Law, Civil Servant Recruitment and Examination Methods, and Civil Servant Recruitment Regulations" all clearly stipulate that those who are listed as targets of joint punishment for breach of trust in accordance with the law shall not be employed as civil servants.

If you are a person subject to execution for breach of trust, you will definitely not be able to take the civil service examination. You will not be able to pass the civil service political examination 100% of the time.

However, if your father is the person subject to execution for breach of trust, the relevant laws and regulations do not have clear provisions and there are no mandatory restrictions. Currently, the methods used by courts at all levels to punish defaulters do not include any means of restricting the employment of their children.

The People's Daily once published an article called "It is difficult for the children of old people to take public exams? Don't let Lian Si thinking set up mines for grassroots governance." It clearly stated: "For public power agencies, the law It is prohibited without authorization. Therefore, state agencies, enterprises and institutions do not accept candidates because of their parents’ breach of trust, which is a violation of the candidates’ legitimate rights.”

However, there are indeed news reports, which have occurred in some areas. There are examples of "parents' breach of trust leading to their children's failure to apply for civil service examinations and public institutions' political examinations", and there is also the example of "an old man in Nanxun, Huzhou who refused to repay the money, but his children immediately paid off the debt after passing the civil service written examination."

So, why does this happen?

The reason is very simple. The official name of civil servant political review is "employment inspection". This is a highly subjective step. In addition to hard-and-fast measures such as violations of laws and disciplines, there are also some ambiguous matters that largely depend on Due to the subjective judgment of the members of the inspection team, this has also led to different results in actual operations in various places.

Article 7 of the "Civil Service Recruitment Inspection Methods (Trial)" stipulates that the inspection team generally only examines the candidate's personal morality, ability, diligence, performance, integrity, etc. However, Article 8 also stipulates that for those applying for confidential, national security and other confidential positions, the relevant circumstances of family members and major social relationships should generally be examined.

In other words, if you are applying for an ordinary position, the investigation of your father’s situation will generally not be extended; however, if you apply for the Public Security Bureau and other departments, the investigation of your father’s situation will be extended.

However, no one can tell clearly about the political review. There is no need for you to pin your fate on an illusory possibility. Please patiently persuade your father to return the money and remove him from the list of dishonest persons. Wouldn’t it be better to delete it and then take the exam with peace of mind and no worries?

Finally, let me talk about my personal opinion. I do not support the children of old people taking the civil service examination.

First of all, the prerequisite for becoming a breach of trust person is that the court determines that he has the ability to repay but deliberately fails to repay. Such a person's moral quality is obviously low. Can children educated in such a family serve the people wholeheartedly? ? Will the people believe that such a person can be a good civil servant?

At present, the state’s requirements for civil servants are to have firm beliefs, serve the people, be diligent and pragmatic, dare to take responsibility, be honest and honest, and be high-quality and professional. Does such a person qualify? Can you feel at ease?

Moreover, the annual civil service examination is so popular and there are so many applicants. Why should we choose a person with moral flaws instead of an innocent person?

If you choose the latter, at least the probability of violating discipline and law in the future will be lower, right?

Currently, laws and regulations do not restrict the employment of children of dishonest persons, but morally speaking, shouldn’t we condemn this situation?

So, paying back the money as soon as possible and becoming a civil servant is the right path.

Welcome to follow @蛛杰小庄 and let’s talk about the little knowledge within the system.